HORIZON Historic Preservation Plan Element. The Comprehensive Historic Preservation Plan for Lawrence and Unincorporated Douglas County

Transcription

1 HORIZON 2020 Historic Preservation Plan Element The Comprehensive Historic Preservation Plan for Lawrence and Unincorporated Douglas County July 25, 2011 July DRAFT Horizon 2020 Preservation Plan Element

2 HORIZON 2020 Historic Preservation Plan Element The Comprehensive Historic Preservation Plan for Lawrence and Unincorporated Douglas County Lawrence-Douglas County Metropolitan Planning Office July 25, 2011 This project was funded, in part, from a grant from the Kansas State Historical Society Cultural Resource Division through funding from the Historic Preservation Fund, National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. The contents and opinions, however, do not necessarily reflect the view or policies of the United States Department of the Interior or the Kansas State Historical Society. This program receives federal funds from the National Park Service. Regulations of the U.S. Department of the Interior strictly prohibit unlawful discrimination in departmental federally assisted programs on the basis of race, color, national origin, age or handicap. A person who believes he or she has been discriminated against in any program, activity or facility operated by a recipient of federal assistance should write to: Office of Equal Opportunity, National Park Service, 1849 C Street, NW, Washington, D.C. The 2003 draft of this document was prepared by Historic Preservation Services, LLC, in conjunction with the Lawrence-Douglas County Metropolitan Planning Office. July DRAFT Horizon 2020 Preservation Plan Element

3 LAWRENCE CITY COMMISSION MAYOR Aron E. Cromwell VICE MAYOR Bob Schumm COMMISSIONERS Mike Amyx Hugh Carter Michael Dever DOUGLAS COUNTY COMMISSION CHAIRMAN Jim Flory COMMISSIONERS Mike Gaughan Nancy Thellman LAWRENCE-DOUGLAS COUNTY METROPOLITAN PLANNING COMMISSION Charles Blaser, Chair Richard Hird, Vice Chair Deron Belt Pennie von Achen Brad Finkeldei Clay Britton Lara Adams Burger Kenzie Singleton Bryan Culver Bruce Liese HISTORIC RESOURCES COMMISSION Jody Meyer, Chair Alan Wiechert, Vice Chair Chad Foster Michael Arp Tristan Smith Sean Williams ORIGINAL STEERING COMMITTEE Marilyn Bittenbender Paul Caviness Shelley Hickman Clark Virgil Dean David Dunfield Ron Durflinger Bo Harris Stan Hernly Bob Johnson Dr. Terry Riordan Ron Schneider Shawn Pine LAWRENCE-DOUGLAS COUNTY METROPOLITAN PLANNING OFFICE Scott McCullough, Director Lynne Braddock Zollner, Historic Resources Administrator Special thanks is due to the many other staff members, governmental jurisdictions, and interested citizens who made substantial contributions to this project. July DRAFT Horizon 2020 Preservation Plan Element

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Why a Preservation Plan? What is a Preservation Plan? Horizon 2020 Preservation Planning Process Overall Horizon 2020 Preservation Planning Goals CHAPTER TWO PLAN AREA Natural and Man-Made Environmental Features Development Patterns Land Use Population Growth CHAPTER THREE FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS Federal Framework State Framework Local Framework Preservation Activity Overview Importance of Local Programs in Preservation Planning CHAPTER FOUR HISTORIC OVERVIEW Prehistory Historic Native American Culture Historical Development, Historic Development, Kansas Territory and Douglas County Historic Development of Lawrence CHAPTER FIVE PRESERVATION GOALS, POLICIES, AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES CHAPTER SIX ACTION PLAN AND TIMELINE APPENDICES APPENDIX A. EXHIBITS AND MAPS List of Lawrence National Register, State Register, and Local Register Properties List of Douglas County National Register and State Register Properties City of Lawrence Surveyed Properties City of Lawrence Recommended Survey Plan July DRAFT Horizon 2020 Preservation Plan Element

5 Douglas County Unincorporated Area Surveyed Properties Douglas County Unincorporated Survey Plan APPENDIX B. Glossary Bibliography APPENDIX C. BACKGROUND STUDIES COMPANION DOCUMENT Workshop Participant Self-Evaluation Workshop No. 1 & 2 Workbook Workshop No. 3 Workbook Public Participation Geographic Distribution Sheets Issue Prioritization Sheet (Workshop # 3) Goals, Policies and Strategies Prioritization Sheet (Workshop # 4) Workshop No. 4 Workbook City of Lawrence Preservation Ordinance July DRAFT Horizon 2020 Preservation Plan Element

6 Executive Summary HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-1 Introduction

7 Executive Summary The Horizon 2020 Historic Preservation Plan Element provides Lawrence and unincorporated Douglas County with both a broad-based and inclusive preservation model. Its goal is to create opportunities to preserve, enhance and develop, through preservation activities and programs, livable, vital, and sustainable neighborhoods, commercial centers, cultural landscapes, and rural communities. The plan broadly focuses on the city s and county s cultural resources, including its buildings, neighborhoods and streetscapes, historic sites, trails, battlefields, open spaces, and prehistoric and historic archaeological sites. These are the assets that provide a unique sense of place in the region. This historic preservation plan element presents goals, policies, and implementation strategies that integrate historic preservation into the city s and the county s planning and land use policies and processes. By capitalizing on historic preservation s demonstrated strengths, reinforcing current programs, and initiating both short- and long-term new efforts, the city and the county can not only protect valuable resources, they can also coordinate the processes involved in this protection. PRESERVATION PLAN GOALS The City of Lawrence and Douglas County possess a unique legacy of built and natural resources that reflect its rich history. This legacy deserves to be protected and preserved. This plan capitalizes on the demonstrated success of historic preservation methodology as a tool for revitalization of older neighborhoods and commercial centers, the popularity of traditional urban environments, the fast-growing heritage and cultural tourism industry, and the strong public support for environmental stewardship and sustainability. It provides strategies that place preservation as an important component in the city and county s planning and development programs. Six goals compose the key elements of the plan. Incorporate Historic Preservation as an Important Component of the City and County Planning Processes. Identify and conserve the historic areas and places in unincorporated Douglas County. Incorporate Preservation Incentives into the City and County s Economic Development Policies and Programs. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-2 Introduction

8 Incorporate Heritage Tourism as an Economic Development Program. Establish Outreach and Educational Programs. Incorporate Historic Preservation into the City and County s sustainability Policies and Programs. WHY A HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN? Historic preservation offers two distinct benefits. The preservation of historic resources has its own intrinsic value in celebrating the city and the county s diverse cultural heritage, in honoring the craftsmanship of other eras, in instilling the values by which we live, and in understanding the relationships of the past, the present, and the future. Historic preservation also has proven practical value as a tool for economic development and environmental stewardship. Economic Benefit The most successful revitalization efforts in the country (cities, towns, or rural communities) utilize historic rehabilitation and preservation as the core of their revitalization strategies. Throughout the nation, there are successful models for preservation programs that demonstrate the positive economic impact that occurs when historic preservation is used as a tool for planned revitalization efforts in older neighborhoods and commercial centers. Public policy that integrates historic preservation into the planning process and targets it to definable areas provides a level of stability that attracts both short- and long-term investment. Revitalized neighborhoods provide a stable population, a greater tax base, higher job retention, and less drain on city services. Heritage Tourism Venues Preserved neighborhoods and commercial centers attract visitors. Heritage tourism is big business. This plan provides initiatives that capitalize on existing historic resources and themes and presents approaches to developing new heritage tourism programs that promote local and regional synergy, allowing the city and county to capitalize on their historic resources. Lawrence and Douglas County can claim a role in the development of cultural, economic, and political forces of local, state, and national significance. Lawrence and Douglas County retain tangible ties to prehistoric and historic indigenous peoples, the era of European exploration and the fur trade, the Santa Fe commercial trade route, the establishment of the Indian Territory, the Oregon and California HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-3 Introduction

9 emigrant trails, the abolitionist movement, the Border War, the Civil War, the evolution of regional livestock and agricultural industries and an acclaimed State university. Environmental Stewardship and Sustainability Historic preservation is an important component in environmental stewardship and sustainable development. The citizens of Lawrence and Douglas County increasingly support environmental conservation efforts. This growing awareness of how local conditions fit into larger environmental issues has led to the recognition of the importance of natural resources and of the embodied energy contained in the built environment. Historic preservation practices are tools for better stewardship of older buildings, neighborhoods, and rural landscapes. The conservation and improvement of our existing built resources, including the re-use and improvement of historic structures, is central to our community s overall plan for environmental stewardship and sustainable development. The Federal, State, and Local Preservation Partnership Many of the nation s preservation programs are part of a partnership between federal, state, and local government. The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 created the framework for the National Register of Historic Places, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and authorized matching grants-in-aid to states. By October of 1966, the Secretary of the Interior asked the governor of each state to appoint an individual to help accomplish the directives of the National Historic Preservation Act including the review and allocation of matching grants-in-aid. In 1980 the National Park Service created the Certified Local Government program to formalize the partnership between the National Park Service, acting on behalf of the Federal Government, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), acting on behalf of the state government, and local governments. Federal laws affect preservation in a number of ways. They authorize federal support for national, state, and local preservation programs; define procedures for the identification, evaluation, and protection of cultural resources; provide incentives to protect resources; and mandate procedures to review the impact of federal undertakings on significant cultural resources. Among the most successful preservation incentives are the 20 percent rehabilitation tax credit for income-producing properties listed individually or as contributing to a district in the National Register of Historic Places and the low-income housing credit that can be combined with the rehabilitation credit. Owners of properties that are listed in the HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-4 Introduction

10 National Register can donate a preservation easement to a not-for-profit entity and receive a charitable contribution deduction. Easements may be donated for buildings, scenic or landscape elements, or for open space. Each state administers federal preservation programs as well as programs established by the state. The Cultural Resources Division of the Kansas Historical Society provides technical assistance and administers a number of grant and incentive programs, as well as federal programs. The Kansas Legislature passed a 25 percent tax credit for rehabilitation of income-producing and residential properties listed individually or as contributing to a district in the National Register of Historic Places. The program uses the same criteria as the federal rehabilitation tax credit program and is designed to piggy back onto the federal tax credits. By design, the strongest element of the federal, state and local government preservation partnership is at the local level. The City of Lawrence was designated as a Certified Local Government in This status indicates a partnership in compliance with federal guidelines for local government historic preservation programs. The Lawrence-Douglas County Metropolitan Planning Office administers the program assisted by the Lawrence Historic Resources Commission. The regulatory framework for preservation in the city is in place through the Conservation of Historic Resources (Chapter 22) Code of the City of Lawrence. The City of Lawrence also has an agreement with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) to conduct reviews required by the State Preservation Law. Douglas County does not have a formal preservation program. Under federal guidelines, the county could establish a preservation program focusing on the preservation of resources within the unincorporated areas of Douglas County and become a Certified Local Government. In addition to the various government preservation programs, there are a number of well-established private entities neighborhood associations, professional groups, historical societies, and preservation organizations that provide a variety of research, technical, educational, and advocacy roles in promoting the preservation of cultural resources. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-5 Introduction

11 HORIZON 2020 PRESERVATION PLAN ELEMENT This plan for preservation outlines goals, policies, and implementation strategies designed to identify, evaluate, and protect the cultural resources in the City of Lawrence and in the unincorporated areas of Douglas County. A summary outline of these elements is provided below. Chapter Five provides a narrative elaboration to provide a clear understanding of their intent. GOAL # 1: POLICY 1.1: INCORPORATE PRESERVATION AS AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF THE CITY AND COUNTY PLANNING PROCESSES EXPAND HISTORIC PRESERVATION IDENTIFICATION, EVALUATION, AND PROTECTION PROGRAMS Implementation Strategies a. Expand the cultural resource survey process to identify important resources to be considered in all city and county planning processes. b. Update the existing National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form for Lawrence to include properties that have achieved historic significance since c. Work with the State Historic Preservation Office s interactive online database, the Kansas Historic Resources Inventory (KHRI), to establish an up-to-date survey database. d. Launch an ongoing effort to create National Register and local historic districts in the city with design guidelines to maximize the potential to stabilize and increase property values while protecting resources. e. In conjunction with property owners, develop and implement a National Register, and State Register nomination plan for significant historic properties within the unincorporated areas of the county. f. Identify and evaluate, during the development review process, properties that are fifty years 1 or older that will be affected by development proposals such as rezoning, platting, development plans, conditional use permits, and use permitted upon review permits. g. Working with property owners, develop a program to list as many eligible properties in the National Register and State Register as possible, enabling property owners to utilize the federal and state rehabilitation tax credits. h. Reevaluate the city s demolition ordinance and investigate streamlining the 30-day waiting period by developing a policy for properties which are potentially eligible for listing. 1 The National Park Service s criteria for evaluation of historical significance exclude properties that achieved significance within the last fifty years unless they are of exceptional importance. Fifty years is the general estimate of time needed to develop the necessary historical perspective to evaluate significance. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-6 Introduction

12 i. Explore alternative protection mechanisms used in other communities for protection programs for identified significant rural resources. POLICY 1.2: DEVELOP OR MODIFY APPROPRIATE ZONING, BUILDING CODE, AND FIRE CODE REGULATIONS TO FACILITATE THE PRESERVATION AND REHABILITATION OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES. Implementation Strategies a. Investigate the possibility of creating additional conservation districts as an alternative protection mechanism and standard for environs review. b. Review and update existing city zoning to be compatible with existing or desired land use that promotes preservation of intact residential neighborhoods and commercial centers that have historical, architectural, and physical integrity. Among the issues to be considered are: 1. consistency between overlay zoning and base land use zoning among contiguous properties; 2. flexible provisions for developing compatible new infill construction on vacant lots; 3. allowance of innovative preservation alternatives, such as additional or specialty uses including bed and breakfast, studios, and other professional uses; 4. appropriate design guidelines and site development controls to encourage quality rehabilitation and compatible new construction worthy of preservation in the future; and 5. effective procedures to discourage demolition of significant buildings and structures. c. Require new development in established areas of the city to use designs complementary to the adjacent streetscape. d. Create transition zones and flexible links within Lawrence by using setbacks, alleys, parks, and open space in a way that is consistent with established patterns. e. Adopt a rehabilitation code to address building code and fire code requirements in historic structures for the City of Lawrence and Douglas County. POLICY 1.3: DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT FORMALIZED PROCEDURES TO COORDINATE PRESERVATION EFFORTS AMONG CITY AND COUNTY DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-7 Introduction

13 Implementation Strategies a. Establish formalized procedures for the Lawrence Historic Resources Commission (HRC) or the Historic Resources Administrator to review and comment on City planning activities. b. Facilitate the integration of the development review process and the building permitting process with the design review process. Consider alternative processes for project review. c. Require historic preservation elements as part of comprehensive, watershed or sub-basin, sector, neighborhood, and special area plans. d. Implement consistent and systematic building and maintenance code enforcement. e. Enforce environmental code. f. Explore a demolition by neglect ordinance. g. Adopt a rehabilitation building and fire code for the city and the county. h. When possible, historic preservation issues should be represented in appointed positions. Representatives of these entities should also be considered as appointed members on the HRC. i. Working with property owners, target significant cultural landscapes for park/green space designation on the National, State or Local Register. j. Working with property owners, target open space designation to areas with probability for the presence of a high level of archaeological artifacts. Given the limited amount of resources for archaeological investigations, consideration should be given to those sites which have been documented by creditable historical research. k. Include a preservation element in the City of Lawrence s Parks and Recreation Master Plan. l. Require review of new ordinances for their impact on historic resources and historic preservation efforts. POLICY 1.4: IMPROVE EXISTING LOCAL AND STATE LAW DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-8 Introduction

14 Implementation Strategies a. Conduct ongoing inspection of work after HRC review. b. Develop review process that promotes more consistent and objective interpretation of environs law. c. Provide legal enforcement of HRC decisions. d. Reconcile the differences between state law environs review and City of Lawrence s environs review standards. 2 e. Establish a recording process with the Register of Deeds to record National Register, State Register, and Local Register properties. f. Investigate ways to simplify the design review and the state law review process through the integration of building permit applications, design review applications, and development review applications. POLICY 1.5: ESTABLISH CLEAR, WORKING DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW PROCESSES WITH FEDERAL, STATE, COUNTY, PUBLIC, AND PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS LOCATED NEAR HISTORIC RESOURCES. Implementation Strategies a. Develop and continue agreements regarding development policies for federal, state, public and private institutions such as the University of Kansas, Baker University, Haskell University, Lawrence Memorial Hospital, Lawrence School District, Townships, and Rural Water Districts, which are located near historic areas. Such agreements should include community expectations, a public participation process, and development requirements, including development of expansion boundaries. b. Formulate Neighborhood, sector, and special area plans that establish clear boundaries for commercial areas as well as institutions. c. Form stronger partnerships between the Campus Historic Preservation Board and the Lawrence Historic Preservation Commission. POLICY 1.6: DEVELOP A PUBLIC RESOURCES POLICY THAT VALUES HISTORIC PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. 2 There are a number of differences between the State law requirements and the local ordinance requirements. One of the main issues is that the standard of review required under the local ordinance places the burden of proof on the Historic Resources Commission in reviewing environs review cases while the state law places the burden of proof on the applicant. In cases that involve both local ordinance and state law review there is an inherent conflict. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-9 Introduction

15 Implementation Strategies a. Create a comprehensive approach to infrastructure improvements on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis. b. Protect and maintain existing brick streets, brick sidewalks, and hitching posts in the City of Lawrence. c. Restore brick streets and sidewalks in the City of Lawrence. d. Implement appropriate traffic calming measures in residential neighborhoods in the City of Lawrence. e. Investigate and implement initiatives to improve parking in Downtown with minimal impact of older buildings. f. Improve bicycle and pedestrian routes and rural trails. g. Target Parks and Recreation tax revenues when appropriate for cultural resource projects on public lands. h. Improve flood control to protect historic properties. i. Develop a formal review process for all public improvements to determine the effects on historic preservation and/or historic preservation planning efforts. GOAL # 2: POLICY 2.1: IDENTIFY AND CONSERVE THE HISTORIC AREAS AND PLACES IN UNINCORPORATED DOUGLAS COUNTY DEVELOP A PRESERVATION PROGRAM FOR THE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF CULTURAL RESOURCES IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF DOUGLAS COUNTY Implementation Strategies a. Develop and implement a rural survey plan to identify and evaluate rural resources based on a systematic approach by township areas, giving priority to areas with the highest rate of development. 1. A reconnaissance survey of Palmyra Township (1989) identified a number of properties in the community of Vinland and 207 properties with associated structures, and six rural cemeteries in rural Palmyra Township that appeared to be more than fifty years old The farmstead is the most common rural property type in this township. However, examples with a complete intact set of early outbuildings are uncommon. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-10 Introduction

16 2. Commons on the Prairie," (1990), an unpublished master's thesis by Dennis Domer, discussed the historic architecture and cultural landscape of Willow Springs Township; and 3. Map of Historic Douglas County, Kansas," published by Adam Waits and the Douglas County Historical Society (1985) identifies individual buildings and sites of historic significance. b. Working with rural property owners, develop a cultural landscape component for the identification and evaluation of cultural resources. Develop an archaeological survey plan for the County that: 1. includes an archaeological predictive model for Douglas County that identifies areas of high medium and low probability and 2. prioritizes archaeological survey to focus on areas in which development is ongoing and in which resources would most likely be expected. c. Work with the State Historic Preservation Office s interactive online database, the Kansas Historic Resources Inventory (KHRI), to establish an up-to-date survey database. POLICY 2.2: DEVELOP A PRESERVATION PROGRAM FOR THE PROTECTION OF CULTURAL RESOURCES IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF DOUGLAS COUNTY TO BE INTEGRATED INTO COUNTY PLANNING POLICIES AND PROCESSES. Implementation Strategies a. Develop and establish by ordinance a rural preservation program for the unincorporated areas of the county. b. Explore the benefits and liabilities of establishing Douglas County as a separate Local Certified Government (CLG).. c. Investigate successful protection strategies used in other areas of the nation and develop a plan to implement those that are applicable to Douglas County, such as conservation easements and incentives to encourage private stewardship.. d. Develop and implement a National Register and State Register nomination plan for significant historic properties within the unincorporated area of the County.. e. Target and prioritize sites such as the natural areas unplowed prairie and woodlands identified in Horizon for preservation. f. Target significant cultural landscapes for park/green space designation. 3 Horizon HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-11 Introduction

17 g. Target open space to areas with a predictive model for the presence of a high level of archaeological artifacts. h. Investigate the use of funding mechanisms to retain open space around historic sites. POLICY 2.3: ELIMINATE DISINCENTIVES TO ORDERLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Implementation Strategies a. Require annex plans and urban growth boundaries from all municipalities within Douglas County. b. Develop policies that encourage development in the urban growth boundaries of associated municipalities. POLICY 2.4: CONSERVE THE VISUAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN CITY AND RURAL AREAS Implementation Strategies a. Create transition zones between rural areas and the city using wetlands, open spaces, parks, golf courses, "rails to trails," small farm transition areas, and commercial/rural transition areas, i.e., businesses that require open space. b. Continue to investigate and create limits on development outside the urban growth areas or boundaries. c. Promote retention of agricultural land use through programs such as the transfer of development rights and conservation easements. GOAL # 3: POLICY 3.1: INCORPORATE PRESERVATION INCENTIVES INTO THE CITY AND COUNTY S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POLICIES AND PROGRAMS ENCOURAGE THE UTILIZATION AND LINKAGE OF EXISTING INCENTIVES Implementation Strategies a. Develop a program to list as many eligible properties in the National and State Registers as possible, enabling property owners to utilize the federal and state rehabilitation tax credits. b. Maximize the use of incentives by combining them into preservation tool kits different combinations of incentives targeted for specific areas and tailored to certain needs to provide flexible and lasting HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-12 Introduction

18 strategies to address stabilization and revitalization of older residential and commercial centers. c. Target public incentives to projects in areas with existing public infrastructure and significant historic resources. d. Notify owners of eligible properties and assist them in providing access to applicable rehabilitation incentives and grants. e. Investigate the use of Community Development Block Grant funds to foster historic preservation efforts. f. Establish and fund the Historic Preservation Fund as described in city s Conservation of Historic Resources Code. POLICY 3.2: DEVELOP INCENTIVES TO ENCOURAGE THE REHABILITATION AND OCCUPANCY OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES Implementation Strategies a. Attach appropriate design guidelines to incentive programs. b. Create taxing incentives by using such tools as the Neighborhood Revitalization Act. c. Create incentives to increase critical mass development in Downtown. d. Create and target incentives to historic commercial areas such as façade improvement grants and economic incentives to owners or businesses that occupy or lease space in historic buildings. e. Develop and implement policies and programs that eliminate parking issues as a disincentive to rehabilitation of buildings, including review of use permits and accompanying parking requirements and implementation of public/private shared use of parking structures. f. Create incentives to maintain and preserve historically significant farming areas. g. Provide design and/or technical assistance to property owners undertaking preservation projects, such as schematic architectural design assistance for renovation/restoration of residences, businesses, and rural structures. h. Develop incentives to retain and strengthen small neighborhood commercial areas. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-13 Introduction

19 i. Utilize or create incentive programs for abatement of environmental hazards in significant historic buildings. j. Provide incentives to reduce the number of multi-family units in houses originally designed as single-family residences that are located in historic and conservation districts. POLICY 3.3: ELIMINATE DISINCENTIVES TO PRESERVATION EFFORTS Implementation Strategies a. Tax properties that are listed in the National Register, State Register or Local Register at a lower rate. b. Abolish or develop a lower fee schedule for rehabilitation building permits. GOAL # 4: INCORPORATE HERITAGE TOURISM AS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM POLICY 4.1: DEVELOP A COMPREHENSIVE HERITAGE TOURISM PROGRAM THAT INTEGRATES HISTORIC RESOURCES AND VENDORS INTO PROGRAM PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION Implementation Strategies a. Support the Freedom s Frontier National Heritage Area b. Encourage and enter into cooperative regional efforts in programming and networking in public relations and marking efforts. c. Support efforts to ensure the Watkins Community Museum is an important visible partner in heritage tourism and community education efforts. d. Through the National Trust for Historic Preservation Heritage Tourism Program, the city/county should enlist the participation of all communities in Douglas County, sites, and museums to conduct a comprehensive management and interpretive assessment and to develop cooperative interpretive, marketing and programming plans. 1. Inventory of current and potential attractions. 2. Assess current attractions, visitor services, organizational capabilities, preservation resources, and marketing programs. 3. Establish priorities and measurable goals through organizing human and financial resources. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-14 Introduction

20 4. Prepare for visitors through development of long-term management goals that protect historic resources. 5. Market for success through development of a multi-year, multiple-tier targeted marketing plan involving local, regional, State, and national partners. 6. Develop cooperative efforts between the Lawrence/Douglas County Chamber of Commerce and local preservation groups. POLICY 4.2: ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT OF BLACK JACK BATTLEFIELD AS A SIGNIFICANT SITE IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES. Implementation Strategies a. Support the efforts of the Black Jack Battlefield & Nature Park to document the history of this site. b. Support the efforts of the Black Jack Battlefield & Nature Park to encourage the development of this site as part of the Freedom s Frontier National Heritage Area. c. Encourage and enter into cooperative regional efforts in programming and networking in public relations and marking efforts that promote this significant historic site. GOAL # 5: POLICY 5.1: ESTABLISH OUTREACH AND EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS DEVELOP A GOVERNMENT SPONSORED PUBLIC INFORMATION OUTREACH PROGRAM Implementation Strategies a. Make public aware of available funding sources. b. Develop or provide hands-on materials that provide information on how to repair and preserve historic buildings according to the Secretary of the Interior s Guidelines for the Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings. c. Provide information on historic neighborhoods (i.e. promote walking tours). d. Provide notification each spring, prior to the construction season, to property owners in local districts, National Register properties, and State Register properties of the design guidelines and procedures to obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness and/or State Law Review. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-15 Introduction

21 e. Develop in-house materials for other city/county department staff about preservation processes and issues in order to assist in building consensus in applying preservation procedures. f. Provide on-going preservation education sessions for members of appointed bodies including the Historic Resources Commission, City Commission, and Planning Commission. g. Expand the city s webpage to include additional information regarding National Register listing, survey information, how-to materials, etc. h. Work with existing hardware and home improvement stores to provide hands on materials regarding historic preservation issues. POLICY 5.2: IN PARTNERSHIP WITH AN APPROPRIATE LOCAL ORGANIZATION, ASSIST IN DEVELOPING AND CONDUCTING A SERIES OF PUBLIC WORKSHOPS TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC ABOUT PRESERVATION Implementation Strategies: a. Establish forums for realtors, rural lenders, developers, contractors, preservationists, business community leaders, and neighborhood groups to acquaint them with preservation benefits, issues and procedures. POLICY 5.3: DEVELOP MEDIA RELATIONS TO BE AN ADVOCATE FOR PRESERVATION Implementation Strategy a. Promote preservation news in local press through press releases during National Preservation Week that focus on the economic impact of preservation, as well as local newsworthy events, and recent local, state or national designations, etc. POLICY 5.4: DEVELOP PROACTIVE RECOGNITION PROGRAMS Implementation Strategy a. Develop a county-wide Heritage Farm honorific program. b. Develop historic signage. c. Encourage the nomination of projects for local, state and national awards programs. POLICY 5.5: COORDINATE PRESERVATION PROGRAMS IN THE COUNTY AND CITY WITH OTHER LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS AND ORGANIZATIONS HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-16 Introduction

22 Implementation Strategy a. Establish a countywide coordinating entity that includes private and public organizations and agencies. Primary goals should be: 1. development of an outreach program to unincorporated areas of the county to involve property owners in historic preservation initiatives; and 2. joining rural and city constituencies in cooperative efforts. GOAL # 6: INCORPORATE SUSTAINABLE PRESERVATION INTO THE CITY AND COUNTY S SUSTAINABILITY POLICIES AND PROGRAMS POLICY 6.1: ENCOURAGE AND INCORPORATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN SUSTAINABLE PLANNING AND BUILDING PRACTICES Implementation Strategies: a. Foster a culture of reuse of existing structures by maximizing the life cycle of existing buildings. b. Encourage reinvestment in the existing built environment. 1. Explore and adopt building codes that give a discount on the overall permit fee for the reuse of historic structures. 2. Identify and promote programs that identify historic building materials, like first growth wood and historic lath and plaster, and the values they bring to structures. c. Explore the use of outcome-based codes. d. Explore the adoption of building codes that create sustainable communities. e. Explore the adoption of demolition codes that require sustainable practices like 1. A percentage of demolition debris to be recycled and reused 2. Demolition permit fees that reflect the values of historic resources. POLICY 6.2: DEVELOP PROGRAMS THAT ENCOURAGE PRESERVATION AS PART OF CREATING A SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY. Implementation Strategy a. Develop and adopt sustainability design guidelines for historic districts. b. Develop and implement programs for City and County buildings that maintain historic fabric and reduce natural resource consumption. c. Encourage and support the development of energy strategies. d. Encourage and support the development of sustainable energy systems that can provide energy for multiple historic properties that cannot achieve sustainable energy goals individually. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-17 Introduction

23 e. Utilize increased permit fees for the demolition of historic structures to fund a preservation fund to create low interest loans or grants that facilitate the rehabilitation of historic structures. POLICY 6.3: DEVELOP AN EDUCATION PROGRAM TO INCORPORATE SUSTAINABLE PRESERVATION INTO PUBLIC INFORMATION OUTREACH PROGRAMS ON SUSTAINABILITY Implementation Strategies a. Develop City and County Sponsored Public Information Outreach Programs that promote sustainability through preservation and rehabilitation of historic structures. 1. Establish forums for realtors, developers, contractors, and preservationists to inform them about sustainable preservation benefits, issues and procedures. b. Align Historic Preservation Policies with sustainability policies. 1. Assist the Sustainability Advisory Board with the development of goals and priorities for future cultural resource conservation efforts. 2. Work with the Sustainability Coordinator to identify practical methods and programs to reach the City s goals for sustainability. 3. Identify and encourage the adoption of Preservation goals, policies, and programs that incorporate sustainable community ideals. c. Work with the Sustainability Coordinator to identify education programs and opportunities to promote preservation and sustainability. d. Promote educational programs that identify sustainable development and how it differs from sustainable design. 1. Sustainable Development is not limited to environmental sustainability. 2. Sustainable Development is also economic sustainability and cultural sustainability. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-18 Introduction

24 Introduction Why a Preservation Plan? What is a Preservation Plan? How is the Preservation Plan Used? Horizon 2020 Preservation Planning Process Overall Horizon 2020 Preservation Planning Goals HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-20 Introduction

25 Chapter One Introduction WHAT IS A PRESERVATION PLAN? This preservation plan for Lawrence and the unincorporated areas of Douglas County reflects the desire to shape the future image of the community and provides the foundation and framework for making physical development and policy decisions in the future. It is a policy plan stating the community's desires for directing city and county preservation activities through identified goals and policies. It is both short- and long-range, considering Lawrence and Douglas County's expected growth in the future. It is comprehensive, considering urban and rural land use, property maintenance, economic development, and education and outreach needs that will continue to influence preservation planning. The preservation plan component provides a vision for the community. It is used as a policy guide that identifies the community's goals for directing planning decisions and preservation activities. It is designed to be integrated into city and county planning, land use, and economic development programs. It also provides property owners and residents with an understanding of how the city and county plan to protect cultural resources, particularly in the evaluation of new development, the design and adoption of area and neighborhood plans, and in the design and implementation of economic development strategies. Most importantly, this plan not only integrates preservation goals, policies, and strategies into city and county processes, it allows decision makers to look at preservation issues within the context of other land use and development issues. WHY A PRESERVATION PLAN? Like many communities and rural areas nationwide, Lawrence and Douglas County experienced significant growth during the last decade. New development is evident along the roads leading into the City s historic core and in previously rural farmland in the county. Arising from this growth are new land use and economic development issues. In particular, a preservation plan addresses the issues arising from new commercial and residential development and the consequent decline and disappearance of older neighborhoods, commercial centers, farmsteads, and villages. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-21 Introduction

26 The historic development of Lawrence and Douglas County is a unique and important story. It defines the culture of the community and provides tangible reminders of its past, creating a unique sense of place. The story of the County and its communities is intrinsically entwined with the story of the development of the United States an evolution over 200 years of ethnic and cultural interaction and amalgamation. It is an experience of diversity both in natural environment and cultural heritage. The inhabitants of Douglas County witnessed and participated in events that significantly contributed to that national experience. Few communities or counties can boast of intimate associations with the era of European exploration, the westering movement, the Santa Fe commercial route, the California and Oregon overland emigrant trails, the Border and Civil wars, the establishment of a regional livestock and agriculture industry, and associations with an acclaimed state university and a notable Native American university. Thus, Lawrence and Douglas County are important not only for their own unique history; they are also significant for their associations with the history of the trans-mississippi West. The physical impact of rapidly developing suburban enclaves already obscures much of that past. As new housing and commercial developments spring up on previously unexcavated prairie pasture, the physical destruction of former farmland reduces an understanding of the historical development of Douglas County. Less obvious is the random destruction of buildings, structures, and sites that have associations to the unique history of Douglas County and, in particular, of Lawrence as a free state settlement, educational center, railroad market town, and county seat that developed in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The loss of these physical elements that historically defined the core of the community significantly impacts its identity its unique attributes that distinguishes it from other communities in the region. Lawrence and Douglas County will continue to change. Change, however, provides the opportunity to strengthen and enrich the city s and county s visual character and to enhance the quality of life already appreciated by many residents and visitors. The goal of this preservation plan is to move toward change in a positive manner, as a catalyst for capitalizing on the synergy of the old and new. To achieve this goal, it is necessary first to recognize and understand the assets that contribute to the city s and county s unique physical and cultural character; then to forge a consensus regarding their preservation; and after that to develop goals, policies and initiatives to assist elected officials and citizens in supporting future identification, interpretation, evaluation and protection of Lawrence s and Douglas County s remaining cultural resources. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-22 Introduction

27 BENEFITS OF PRESERVATION While preservation of cultural resources has its own intrinsic value, the most compelling argument for protecting historic resources is that people like them! People seek historic settings because they reflect quality design, craftsmanship, and materials. They appreciate physical reminders of the past that reflect the depth and diversity of our culture. Preservation also has practical value as a tool for economic development and environmental stewardship. Economic Benefits As noted by real estate expert, Donovan D. Rypkema,... the history of the preservation movement has been one that was largely the preservation of historic structures as an end in itself. Today the cutting edge of preservation isn t as an end itself but as a vehicle for economic development. 4 He notes in his book, The Economics of Historic Preservation, that preservation may be one of the most effective acts of fiscal responsibility governmental entities can undertake. Older neighborhoods and commercial centers represent a considerable taxpayer investment in infrastructure and building stock. Moreover, it is expensive to continue the random extension of public services to outlying areas. The lifetime cost of low-density suburban development is 40 to 400 percent greater than more compact development. 5 Thus, conservation of buildings, neighborhoods, and sites of historic and aesthetic value is one of the best tools for recovering the worth of past investments while fueling new economic activity. 6 The most successful revitalization efforts in the country utilize historic rehabilitation as the core of their economic development strategies. The creative combination of preservation, adaptive reuse, and new construction, capitalizes on the aesthetics and craftsmanship of other eras, provides opportunities for architectural innovation, and promotes problem solving, thereby enhancing the community s character and fabric. 7 Thus, as noted by Carolyn Douthat in Economic Incentives for Historic Preservation, Clear public policy favoring historic preservation, particularly when targeted at identifiable districts, provides a level of certainty and stability necessary to [attract] investment. 8 4 Donovan Rypkema, "Economics and Historic Preservation," Historic Preservation Forum 9:2 (Winter 1995), Ibid., 38 6 Donovan D. Rypkema, The Economics of Historic Preservation A Community Leader s Guide (Washington D.C.: National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1994). 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid., 40, quoting Cathy Douthat, Economic Incentives for Historic Preservation. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-23 Introduction

28 Lawrence has a strong cultural identity. Its cultural and historic resources are among the community s strongest assets in attracting tourists. Heritage Tourism is a national growth industry that supports preservation, builds on the convention and travel business, attracts hundreds of thousands of new visitors, and generates millions of dollars in new spending. It creates jobs and new businesses, and promotes higher property values. Historic preservation can also be an effective rural economic development strategy. Many rural areas lack the ingredients important to industries they imagine they can attract, but they are not without assets. Beauty is, first and foremost, our money crop. And that beauty includes old stone barns, backwater rivers and streams, upland ridges, woodlands, small hamlets, rural churches and cemeteries, and even fields of crops ready for harvest. 9 The wise and strategic use of these resources through historic preservation techniques can lead to economic rewards. By putting these assets to work, rural residents, in cooperation with each other and Douglas County planning entities, can generate new prosperity to attract other forms of economic development along with tourism. 9 Ibid., 20, citing Robert Becker in Enhancing Rural Economics through Amenity Resources. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-24 Introduction

29 Environmental Stewardship Natural resources and energy are valuable assets that should be used judiciously and managed wisely for the benefit of present and future generations. Using preservation as a tool for conservation of resources provides a rational and effective environmental strategy for the future. There is a strong and growing accord among the citizens of Lawrence and Douglas County in support of environmental conservation efforts. This consensus includes the recognition of the important embodied energy contained in built resources and efforts to encourage better stewardship of older buildings and structures. Rehabilitating historic buildings saves energy costs. This energy is measured not just by the amount required to tear down and build anew, it is also measured by the embodied energy existing in the building itself. Embodied energy is the amount of energy invested in a building s construction and improvement energy that has already been expended, materials previously mined or harvested, manufactured, shipped, and assembled. For example, the shell of a two-story brick house contains over one billion BTUs of energy in construction materials. This is equivalent to about eight thousand gallons of gasoline. The replacement of a building results in the loss of that embodied energy plus the added energy cost to demolish the building, remove and dispose of the debris, and manufacture, deliver, and install new material for a new building. 10 Moreover, the life expectancy of rehabilitated historic buildings may well be longer than that of the new structures that replace them. During the later decades of the twentieth century, we as a society began to understand the environmental imperatives of proper disposal of our solid waste. Small towns, cities, and undeveloped rural areas all share the consequences of the growing volume of waste materials. And, while disposable diapers and Styrofoam containers receive public attention, few know that up to 40 percent of solid waste comes from demolition and new construction debris. Random, low-density development in rural areas has environmental costs as well. Among them are environmental pollution, loss of greenbelts and open space and obliteration of community life. HORIZON 2020 PRESERVATION PLAN ELEMENT PLANNING PROCESS The City of Lawrence contracted the firm of Historic Preservation Services LLC (HPS) to complete a comprehensive historic preservation plan for the City and the unincorporated areas of Douglas County. The Kansas State Historical Society Cultural Resources 10 Ibid., 52, citing The Benefits of Cultural Resource Conservation, U.S. Department of Defense. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-25 Introduction

30 Division allocated and administered grant funding from the United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service Historic Preservation Fund. The Lawrence Historic Resources Administrator, Dennis J. Enslinger, facilitated the development of the plan. The goal of the preservation plan is the identification and development of specific goals, policies, and implementation strategies that will guide historic preservation efforts in the community. Historic Preservation Services conducted research, consulted with City staff, and conducted public workshops between August 2001 and June HPS partner, Sally Schwenk served as project lead. Workshop facilitation included the services of HPS partner, Elizabeth Rosin and associate staff member, Dale Nimz. Dale Nimz researched and prepared the Preservation Activity Overview and the Historic Overview sections. Historic Preservation Services, in conjunction with the Historic Resources Administrator, assumed responsibility for providing the following three work products associated with development of the Comprehensive Historic Preservation Plan for Lawrence/Douglas County: A detailed outline of the process to be used in the development of the Comprehensive Historic Preservation Plan for Lawrence/Douglas County. A draft of the Comprehensive Historic Preservation Plan for Lawrence/Douglas County. A final draft of the Comprehensive Historic Preservation Plan for Lawrence/Douglas County in publishable form. The Comprehensive Plan contains the following elements: An Executive Summary providing an overview of the main elements within the plan; An Introduction providing information on the merits of historic preservation and the development of a historic preservation plan; Background information relating to the physical character of the environment, its history, historic contexts and themes, historic/cultural resources, and past and current preservation activities; Preservation issues identified by the general public, steering committee, and government officials during the public meeting process; Preservation opportunities/resources available to individuals, organizations, and government agencies to further the goals and policies identified in the plan; Historic preservation vision statement and community preservation goals; Implementation strategies for preservation goals; and HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-26 Introduction

31 Provisions for periodic review and update. Preliminary Research and Investigation Historic Preservation Services initiated and participated in pre-planning organizational meetings between the consultant team and city staff to design a public participation process, identify participants, establish a schedule and identify various planning studies and policies affecting the plan. In preparation for developing visual aids and agendas for the public participation process and information to be included in the preservation plan, Dale Nimz performed the following tasks: Developed a summary overview of past and current preservation activities, including an overview of survey results, consultant management recommendations, and protection efforts. Developed a historic overview of the project area including pre-history, native culture, historical development, historic contexts and themes, and historic and cultural resources including cultural landscapes, buildings, structures and sites, historic architecture and property types. Sally Schwenk with the assistance of staff: Reviewed local land use ordinances to determine the existing relationship between preservation, zoning, codes, and other related land use and property management ordinances; and incorporated the information into the public participation process and the final preservation plan document. Developed a list of incentives to be considered as preservation strategies during the public participation process and incorporated into the preservation plan. Public Participation After consultation with city staff, HPS developed and conducted a series of public workshops designed for the general public, special interest groups, city staff, and appointed members of planning and preservation commissions. City staff assisted in arranging for and conducting the workshop presentations. Staff also arranged for newspaper notices, flyers, and direct mailings to ensure participation by local residents and interest groups. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-27 Introduction

32 Workshops I and II: The consultants conducted two sessions of the first workshop one at the Carnegie Library in Lawrence and one at the Vinland School in Douglas County. This initial workshop focused on developing a unified vision for preservation activities in the city/county. At these meetings, HPS conducted an introductory overview of the federal, state, and local government preservation network, the role of historic preservation in community planning and economic development, the current local historic preservation programs in Lawrence/Douglas County, and data on identified cultural resources in the project area. After this orientation, participatory exercises focused on identification of the following: general conditions and visual characteristics that currently exist in the city s older neighborhoods and commercial centers and in the county s rural unincorporated areas; character-defining features landmarks, paths, activity centers, areas, and places; man-made and natural physical assets that add value to the city s historic core and rural areas (a physical place, building, street, public fixture, landscape feature, etc.); and man-made and natural physical features, buildings, structures (man-made or natural) that distract from the city s historic neighborhoods and commercial centers and the county s rural areas. After these sessions, HPS and city staff developed a set of preliminary goals and implementation strategies. Workshop III Exercises in this workshop focused on the refinement and prioritization of a base set of goals and implementation strategies. The city staff and HPS Consultant Dale Nimz met with the project steering committee to review the previous workshop results and to incorporate the findings into this workshop. After the public participation, HPS and planning staff met to determine the final draft goals, policies, and implementation strategies. In addition, staff provided comments on the information gathered, the draft historic context, and the preservation activities todate sections of the final plan. From this information, HPS developed a draft report for review by the staff and steering committee in preparation for presenting the draft plan HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-28 Introduction

33 at the final workshop. The steering committee and staff at this point suggested organizations, government agencies, and public/private partnerships that could be assigned responsibility for initiating implementation strategies as well as suggested time frames for the initiation of activities. Six action goals comprise the key elements required to achieve this vision. They form the cornerstones for integrating preservation into the city s and county s planning programs. Goal # 1: Goal # 2: Goal # 3: Goal # 4: Goal # 5: Goal #6 Incorporate Preservation as an Important Component of City and County Planning Processes. Identify and conserve the historic areas and places in unincorporated Douglas County. Incorporate Preservation Incentives into the City and County s Economic Development Policies and Programs. Incorporate Heritage Tourism as an Economic Development Program. Establish Outreach and Educational Programs. Incorporate Historic Preservation into the City and County s sustainability Policies and Programs. Workshop IV - Public Hearing Review Process This final workshop was also a public hearing venue to receive comment upon the final goals, policies, and strategies developed in the workshops and steering committee meetings. Discussion focused extensively on issues relating to rural preservation. Participants also prioritized the goals, policies, and strategies, by ranking the top ten with the highest priority and the ten with the lowest priority. Historic Resources Commission Adoption of Plan The draft Preservation Plan Element was distributed for public comment in April The draft and the public comment were submitted to the Historic Resources Commission for review in October The Historic Resources Commission held a study session on the plan in November 2003 and requested planning staff make some corrections to the document. On May 20, 2004, the Lawrence Historic Resources Commission approved the Preservation Plan Element and forwarded the complete document to the Lawrence Douglas County Planning Commission for review. The Executive Summary of the complete document was to replace the existing Chapter 11 of Horizon HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-29 Introduction

34 Planning Commission Recommendation On July 20, 2004, the Lawrence City Commission received the Preservation Plan Element and referred it to the Lawrence Douglas County Planning Commission for review. The Lawrence Douglas County Planning Commission received the document and referred it to the Comprehensive Plans Committee. On May 25, 2005 the Lawrence Douglas County Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Preservation Plan Element and the proposed Chapter 11 revision. The Commission voted 8-1 to forward the Preservation Plan Element and Chapter 11 revision to the Lawrence City Commission and the Douglas County Board of county Commissioners with a recommendation for approval. The Douglas County Board of County Commissioners received the Preservation Plan Element on February 27, 2006 and tabled the item Historic Resources Commission In January of 2010, the Lawrence Historic Resources Commission directed planning staff to bring the Preservation Plan Element and the revisions to Chapter 11 of Horizon 2020 back to the Commission for review. Public hearings were held on the document during February, March, June and December. The Historic Resources Commission directed planning staff to incorporate the comments the Commission had received on sustainability into the document by adding a sixth goal: Incorporate sustainable preservation into the City and County s sustainability Policies and Programs. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 1-30 Introduction

35 Plan Area HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-0 Plan Area

36 Summary of Background Studies* PLANNING AREA The land use component of the plan includes Lawrence and the unincorporated areas of Douglas County; the economic development component of the Plan has a countywide focus that also includes the incorporated cities of Eudora, Baldwin and Lecompton. The planning area is illustrated in Map 2-1, HORIZON 2020 Planning Area. The area expected to become urbanized in the next 20 years is illustrated in Map 2-2, Urban Area Boundary. This urban area boundary is based on development trends and other factors, including physical constraints (e.g., floodplains) and the projected availability of urban services such as sewer and water. As with any plan, the urban area boundary is subject to change as conditions change. The Lawrence/Douglas County Metropolitan Planning Commission designated the current urban area boundary with the concurrence of the Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT), in The urban area, as defined by KDOT standards, encompasses approximately 40 square miles and includes the proposed alignment of the South Lawrence Trafficway (SLT). Changes in the assumed alignment of this circumferential route could affect the urban area boundary and assumptions in the Plan. In addition to this urbanized area, the Plan identifies the Urban Growth Areas (UGA s) for the incorporated cities within the county. The UGA encompasses more area than the delineated urbanized area, so that 'an area of influence' is identified in which additional standards for development are established because of the area's proximity to an urban area and the impacts development along the fringe may have on future development. *This information is taken directly from Horizon 2020 The Comprehensive Plan for Lawrence and Unincorporated Douglas County. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-1 Plan Area

37 Page purposely left blank. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-2 Plan Area

38 R 19 E R 20 E R 17 E R 18 E R 18 E R 19 E R 18 E R 19 E R 19 E R 20 E R 20 E R 21 E R 20 E R 21 E 000E 100E 300E 000E 100E 300E 400E 500E 700E 900E 500E 600E 700E 1100E 1200E 1300E 1500E 1600E 1700E 1800E 2200E 2300E 2400E 1900E 2100E 2200E 2300E 2400E 1500E 1600E 1700E 1000E 1100E 1300E 70 Map Planning Area 8 E DOUGLAS COUNTY, KANSAS 400E R 1 R 17 E JEFFERS ON COUNTY Map edited Apri l, N T 11 S T 12 S Land Use Recommendations in the do not apply to the incorporated citie of Baldwin, Eudora, and Lecompton (/ 40 GRANT (/ 59 T 11 S T 12 S 2000N Kansas River Lecompton 2000N 1900N 190 0N 1800N (/ 24 (/ 40 ', 70 LECOMPTON Leavenworth County Douglas County SHAWNEE COUNTY 1800N 1700N 1600N LEAVENWORTH COUNTY (/ 40 KANWAKA 1600N T 12 S T 13 S Lawrence T 12 S T 13 S 1400N Eudora Yankee Tank Lake 1400N 1300N Æ# N 1200N 1100N 1000N Clinton Lake WAKARUSA 110 0N EUDORA CLINTON 1200N 1000N T 13 S T 14 S T 13 S T 14 S 800N 800N 700N JOHNSON COUNTY (/ N 600N PALMYRA Lone Star Lake Mile 600N 500N 500N 400N Douglas County State Lake WILLOW SPRINGS MARION T 14 S OSAGE COUNTY (/ 56 Baldwin (/ N T 14 S T 15 S 200N 200N 100 N 100N 000N 1900E 2100E FRANKLIN COUNTY 000N 900E 1000E 600E HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-3 Plan Area

39 Map Urban Area Boundary Urban Area 1 0 HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-4 Plan Area

40 Lawrence and Douglas County have experienced substantial growth since 1950, as shown in Table 2-1. Lawrence experienced a 243 percent increase in population between 1950 and 2000, and the unincorporated areas of Douglas County had an increase of almost 48 percent in this 50-year period. The unincorporated areas of Douglas County experienced an 8 percent decrease in population from 1950 to From 1960 to 2000 the same area experienced a 61 percent increase in population. Lawrence has consistently increased its population each decade, with an increase of 41 percent occurring from 1950 to Lawrence grew at a rate of 15 percent from 1970 to Table 2-1: Population Growth, Lawrence Eudora Baldwin Lecompton Balance of County Douglas County Year Pop % Pop % Pop % Pop % Pop % Pop % , , ,802 34, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Source: US Census and Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Department Since 1970, the population distribution has been consistent, with Lawrence containing 78 to 80 percent of the county s population. Table 2-2: Percentage as a Total of Douglas County Population Year Lawrence Eudora Baldwin Lecompton Balance of County Douglas County % 3% 5% 1% 23% 100% Source: US Census and Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Department HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-5 Plan Area

41 POPULATION PROJECTIONS In making population projections the community must look back to analyze past trends in population growth, while also looking forward to assess factors that may limit the community s future population growth. Projecting the future population growth of a community is an inexact science and the population projections in this Plan are presented as ranges for Lawrence and Douglas County to reflect the possibility of variation in that growth rate. Tables 2-3 and 2-4 and Figures 2-3 and 2-4 are the population projections for Lawrence and Douglas County. Both tables have High, Middle, and Low population projections for the years 2010, 2020, and A range of population projections was created to reflect the difficulty in predicting an exact population for a specific point in the future. Using a population projection range gives the plan flexibility address different growth scenarios over time, for example the provision of sewage treatment. If the city grows at the slower projected rate, increased sewage treatment capacity may not be required for a number of years. However, if the city grows at the faster rate, sewage treatment capacity may need to be increased in the very near future. Lawrence and Douglas County have experienced a stable population growth rate since 1960 making the creation of population projections somewhat simpler. However, the most important component of any population projection model is the establishment of the basic assumptions that will be used in building a projection. In making the projections for both Lawrence and Douglas County the following assumptions were made: Lawrence and Douglas County will continue to be a desirable place for new businesses to locate and existing businesses to expand. This area will continue to experience a positive net in-migration. Lawrence and Douglas County will continue to extend and expand the necessary infrastructure (water treatment, sewer treatment, water and sewer lines, roads, fire, medical, and police protection, etc.) to support the projected population growth. If the necessary infrastructure is not built, the population growth for Lawrence will slow. The area s rate of population growth for the next three decades will be similar to the population growth rate the area has experienced in the last five decades. The same method was use to create both Lawrence and Douglas County population projections. The Low projection model uses a simple linear regression with decennial census data from 1950 to The Middle projection model uses a simple linear regression with data from the Census estimates for the years 1990 to The High estimate model uses the average decade growth rate from of 24 percent. For 2020 the Middle range population projection for Lawrence is 110,406, an increase of 38 percent from year The previous population projection in this plan for Lawrence for the year 2020 was 87,479, which is 22,927 less than the new projections for the year HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-6 Plan Area

42 All of Lawrence and Douglas County Master Plans should be reviewed and, if necessary, revised to reflect these new population projections. As the population in Douglas County increases, the rural areas will become more suburbanized. Figure 2-1 SOURCE: US CENSUS BUREAU AND LAWRENCE/DOUGLAS COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TABLE 2-3: CITY OF LAWRENCE POPULATION PROJECTIONS YEAR 2000* LOW 80,098 88, , ,191 MIDDLE 80,098 95, , ,635 HIGH 80,098 99, , ,296 *Census 2000 figures Source: US Census Bureau and Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Department HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-7 Plan Area

43 Figure 2-2 Source: US Census Bureau and Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Department Table 2-4: Douglas County Population Projections Year 2000* Low 99, , , ,426 Middle 99, , , ,152 High 99, , , ,214 *Census 2000 figures Source: US Census Bureau and Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Department HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-8 Plan Area

44 The projections in Table 2-5 for Eudora, Baldwin City and Lecompton were generated with a simple linear regression, using data from 1970 to These projections are based on the assumption these cities will continue to grow at the same pace that they have for the past 30 years. The projections for the Unincorporated Area were generated by a simple linear regression, using US Census population estimates for 1990 to Table 2-5: Population Projections for Unincorporated Douglas County and Incorporated Areas Year 2000* Eudora 4,307 4,775 5,507 6,239 Baldwin City 3,400 3,621 3,898 4,175 Lecompton Unincorporated Area 11,549 13,407 15,148 16,889 *Census 2000 figures Source: US Census Bureau and Lawrence Douglas/County Planning Department HOUSEHOLDS AND HOUSING UNITS Substantial growth in households, as illustrated in Table 2-6, has also occurred within Lawrence and Douglas County since Lawrence experienced an approximately 68% increase in households between 1970 and The unincorporated areas of Douglas County had an increase of about 14% in the 10-year period between 1980 and 1990 [individual counts were not available from the 1970 census]. Household projections for Lawrence anticipate an increase of 49% between 1990 and Projections for the unincorporated areas indicate an increase of approximately 39% by Table 2-6: Household Growth, Lawrence Eudora Baldwin Lecompton Balance of County Douglas County Year No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % NA NA * * * * Projections prepared by TPAP and the University of Kansas Institute for Public Policy and HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-9 Plan Area

45 Business Research as part of the HORIZON 2020, Phase I Report. The number of building permits issued by Lawrence has been influenced over the years by national economic trends. The number of new single-family residences has been constant over the past 40 years, while the number of new multi-family units has varied greatly from year to year. Only recently has the rate of single-family building permit activity increased in both Lawrence and in unincorporated parts of Douglas County. Figures 2-3 and 2-4 illustrate past building trends in the city and county. Figure 2-7, Residential Growth by Township, illustrates the distribution of new residential growth within the unincorporated areas of Douglas County over the past 25 years. Households, as counted through the census process, typically equate to the number of occupied housing units within a community. The average household size (measured in the 1990 census as 2.35 for Lawrence and 2.42 for the entire county) is projected to decrease over time. As population within the community grows and the average household size decreases, more housing units will be needed to accommodate growth. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-10 Plan Area

46 Figure 2-3 HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-11 Plan Area

47 Figure 2-4 Figure 2-5 HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-12 Plan Area

48 EMPLOYMENT TRENDS Employment growth has also increased substantially between 1970 and 1990 and it is anticipated to continue to grow throughout the planning period. In 1990, over 32,600 Lawrence residents were employed, an increase of nearly 82% over This was nearly 50% of all those living in the city. The fastest growing sectors were finance/insurance/real estate, retail trade and transportation/communications/public utilities. Within Douglas County as a whole, the number of employed residents rose by 82.6% during this 20 year period. These 40,186 workers represented approximately 49% of all those living in the County in The area's job growth rate is anticipated to outpace the local population and household growth rate. Table 2-7 indicates employment growth projections prepared by Trkla, Pettigrew, Allen & Payne (TPAP) [Phase I Report, Part II, Page 74]. Projections were prepared for Lawrence and Douglas County as a whole; employment projections for the cities of Eudora, Baldwin and Lecompton were not included in the Phase I Report (as indicated by --- in the following table). These forecasts will be exceeded if the economic development goal of adding over 20,000 new jobs in the County by the year 2020 is met. Table 2-7: Employment Growth, Lawrence Eudora Baldwin Lecompton Balance of County Douglas County Year No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % NA NA NA 942 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 3514 NA * ** * ** * ** ** Projections prepared by TPAP and the University of Kansas Institute for Public Policy and Business Research as part of the HORIZON 2020, Phase I Report. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-13 Plan Area

49 Figure % of the Lawrence area's employment base works at the University of Kansas, while about 16% work in Downtown Lawrence. Combined, these two employment centers represent over one-third of the urban area's total work force. According to the 1990 US Census, about 18% of the county work force is employed outside Douglas County. This percentage is presented to address the perceived threat that the Lawrence area is becoming a bedroom community for workers in the Kansas City and Topeka areas. The census also indicated that an approximately equal number of the county's workers lived outside Douglas County and commuted to work. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-14 Plan Area

50 LAND USE Existing land use development [as surveyed in 1992] within Lawrence and the unincorporated areas of Douglas County is illustrated in Figure 2-7 below: Single-family residential uses account for approximately 24% of the city and 5% of the unincorporated area of the county. Substantial land area is devoted to public/semi-public uses [16%] and right-of-way [17%] within the city; approximately 14% is vacant. Multiple-family, commercial and industrial uses account for nearly equal land areas within the city. The majority of the unincorporated area, approximately 43%, is devoted to nonresidential agricultural uses, followed closely at 38% by Farm Ranch uses with residential dwellings. Figure Existing Land Use (1992) Existing Land Use Lawrence (1992 Study) Single-Family Residential 24% Multi-Family Residential 6% Commercial 6% Industrial 4% Public/Semi-Public 16% Right-of-Way 17% Vacant Land 14% Parks/Open Space 9% Agricultural 4% Existing Land Use Unincorporated DG Co Farm Ranch w/residence 38.0% Single-Family Residential 5.0% Commercial 0.1% Industrial 0.2% Public/Semi-Public 0.3% Right-of-Way 1.7% Vacant Land 2.3% Parks/Open Space 9.2% Extraction 0.2% Agricultural 43.0% HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-15 Plan Area

51 LAND FORMS Physical development and transportation facilities in Lawrence and Douglas County have been influenced by several geographic features: Mt. Oread and the University of Kansas campus are located in the middle of the Lawrence urban area, and form a physical barrier to continuous street patterns. The area has significant slopes (15% or greater in some areas). As a result, 23rd Street/Clinton Parkway is the only east-west street that extends completely from one side of the city to the other. The Kansas and Wakarusa Rivers and their floodplains form barriers to development on the north, south and northeast sides of the city, and inhibit north-south street extensions. The Kansas River, the larger of the two rivers, has a particularly limiting effect on access from east Lawrence to North Lawrence and Grant Township. Clinton Lake and the area below the dam limit urban development and the extension of east-west streets in the area west of Wakarusa Drive, south of 27th Street. DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS Historically, the majority of development within Douglas County has occurred within Lawrence. The "core area" of Lawrence, which was mostly developed before 1960, is characterized by higher density land uses, a grid street pattern, and a concentration of several employment centers. The core area of Lawrence is generally south of the Kansas River and north of 23rd Street, between Iowa Street and Haskell Avenue. Although this area represents only one percent of the land area of Douglas County, the core area includes more than one-third of the County's household total, and over half of Douglas County's total work force. These patterns are illustrated in Table 2-8 and Figure 2-8, Land Area, Households and Employment. Table 2-8: Land Area, Households and Employment Land Area [Sq. Miles] Households Employment Douglas County (total) ,138 37,318 City of Lawrence ,513 34,809 Core Area ,374 19,460 Table information based upon 1990 US Census counts and the Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Office Database. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-16 Plan Area

52 Figure Land Area, Households, and Employment Distribution HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-17 Plan Area

53 Streets in Lawrence can be divided into two distinct patterns, based upon the time in which development of the area occurred. These different patterns present different problems for the community and often require different solutions. A "grid" street pattern, in which streets are oriented in straight lines, typifies the older "core area" of the city, which was developed between the late 1800s and the 1960s. The core area is dissected by numerous streets, with approximately 8-10 east-west streets and north-south streets in each mile. The straight streets encourage higher traffic speeds. Curvilinear and cul-de-sac residential streets, which discourage through traffic, typify the newer development areas of the city. In some areas where only a portion of a section has been developed, the street system is discontinuous. Roads within the unincorporated areas of the county are laid out on a rectilinear grid pattern primarily on section lines. Roadway separations generally occur every half-mile or mile on a north-south and east-west axis. Gateways are transportation facilities that serve as entrances, or transitions between land uses and transportation corridors. Major gateways are entrances to the county and city from other transportation facilities, and often form a visitor's first impression of the community. Gateways to the county are subtle; major entrances occur along the major highways: I-70 from the east and west; K-10 from the east; US-40 from the west; US-56 from the east and west; US- 59/24/40 from the north and US-59 from the south. Gateways to the city are more distinct. Major gateways include: N. 2nd/3rd Street - US 59/24/40 from the north and east via the east toll plaza of the Kansas Turnpike; McDonald Drive via the west toll plaza of the Kansas Turnpike from the north; Iowa Street/US-59 from the south; W. 6th Street/US-40 from the west, including new access via the Lecompton interchange at the Kansas Turnpike and the SLT; 23rd Street/K-10 from the east; and Clinton Parkway from the west Minor gateways into the city include: 15th Street from the east and west; Haskell Avenue from the south; and Louisiana Street from the south. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-18 Plan Area

54 ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES Douglas County is characterized by a variety of environmental and natural conditions that will influence physical development and preservation potentials. These include soils, hydrologic conditions, slopes, and natural areas. Soils Soil types within Douglas County are directly related to the underlying geology and natural climactic conditions of the region. The USDA Soil Conservation Service 1976 Soil Survey of Douglas County identifies five basic soil associations that incorporate classes or series of soils throughout the County. Most of these soils have some limitations for construction due either to unstable slopes or shrink-swell characteristics. Soil conditions on steep slopes, most often found near major water bodies and drainage tributaries, may be severe enough to preclude development. Major portions of Douglas County also contain soils that are productive for pasture, range and agricultural uses. Drainage Basins A long-range Wastewater Master Plan for the Lawrence area was completed in the summer of 1995 by Black & Veatch. The study area for this report is generally bounded by the Kansas River and the North Lawrence area on the north, County Route 1057 on the east, the Wakarusa River on the south as far west as Clinton Dam, and north from the Clinton Lake along the western ridgeline of the study area to the Kansas River. The study area contains approximately 61 square miles and is divided into two distinct watersheds. The northern half of the study area is located in the Kansas River Watershed and drains north to the Kansas River. The southern half of the study area is located in the Wakarusa River Watershed and drains south to the Wakarusa River. The two watersheds are further divided into eight drainage basins for wastewater planning purposes: Kansas River, North Lawrence, Central, East Lawrence, Wakarusa River, Yankee Tank Creek, Baldwin Creek, and Lake View Lake. These basins, established for wastewater planning purposes, are illustrated in the 1995 Black & Veatch study. A long-range Stormwater Management Master Plan was also developed during 1995 by Burns & McDonnell Engineers. The study included 17 principal drainage basins, covering approximately 26 square miles of Kansas and Wakarusa River tributaries. Map 2-3, Lawrence Area Drainage Basins illustrates the following drainage basins: Yankee Tank West [756 acres/ 1.18 sq. mi.]; Hidden Valley [1,788 acres/ 2.79 sq. mi.]; Quail Creek [1,028 acres]; Yankee Tank East [1,747 acres]; Naismith [1,036 acres]; KLWN [486 acres]; Belle Haven [260 acres]; Broken Arrow [235 acres]; Haskell [824 acres]; Deerfield [898 acres]; Riverside [337 acres]; Country Club [1,217 acres]; Downtown [1,095 acres]; East Lawrence [830 acres]; Brook Street [397 acres]; Sunflower [189 acres]; and North Lawrence [934 acres]. UTILITIES Existing utility provision systems are described in the HORIZON 2020 Background Studies. Water treatment and distribution facilities owned and operated by Lawrence provide water service from Clinton Lake and the Kansas River to water users within the city. The city also maintains contracts for treatment services for Baldwin City and several Rural Water Districts that provide service to unincorporated areas of Douglas County. A long-range Water Master Plan Update for Lawrence has recently been completed by Black and Veatch that outlines system improvements to serve Lawrence and growth areas through the year Wastewater treatment facilities are operated by Lawrence by a treatment facility located along HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-19 Plan Area

55 the south side of the Kansas River at Eighth Street. Services are provided to properties within the city limits and an area west of the city located within a county sewer benefit district. As noted above, Black and Veatch has recently completed a long-range Wastewater Master Plan Update for Lawrence that identifies system improvements to serve the city and growth areas through the year The update of the Wastewater Master Plan utilized the original population projections contained in HORIZON These projections were underestimated, so it is advisable that the Wastewater Master Plan, and all other relevant city master plans that relied on the original HORIZON 2020 population projections, be updated based on the new population growth information. Wastewater treatment for property located in the majority of the unincorporated areas of the county is provided by on-site septic disposal systems that are regulated by the Douglas County Health Department. As the county becomes more urbanized, the county may wish to reassess the widespread use of individual septic disposal systems in the county. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-20 Plan Area

56 Map Lawrence Area Drainage Basins Riverside Deerfield Country Club North Lawrence Yankee Tank West Downtown 1 0 Hidden Valley Quail Creek Yankee Tank East Naismith East Lawrence Broken Arrow Brook Street Sunflower KLWN Belle Haven Haskell Source: Stormwater Managment Master Plan; Burns & McDonnell eng HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 2-21 Plan Area

57

58 Preservation Partnerships HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-1 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

59 Chapter Three -- Preservation Partnerships A variety of federal, State and local laws and incentive programs protect thousands of historic properties in the United States. The State of Kansas laws provide protection of properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places and the Register of Historic Kansas Places. In general, local preservation laws provide the most substantive protection for historic properties. FEDERAL FRAMEWORK A large number of federal laws affect historic preservation in various ways: by establishing preservation programs for federal, state, and local government agencies; by establishing procedures for different kinds of preservation activities; and by creating opportunities for preservation of different kinds of resources. The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, is the centerpiece of historic preservation programs in the United States. The Act s primary mandates authorize the Department of the Interior, National Park Service to expand and maintain the National Register of Historic Places; provide for the establishment of State Historic Preservation Officers to administer federal preservation programs; specify how local governments can be certified for participation in federal programs; authorize preservation grants-in-aid to states and local governments; provide a process for federal agencies to consider and mitigate adverse impacts on historic properties that are within their control; and establish a rehabilitation tax credit program for private property owners that is also part of the Internal Revenue Code. The tax codes also allow charitable contributions through façade and scenic easements. Many of the programs established as a result of the mandates of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 are cooperative programs between the National Park Service, acting as a Federal partner, and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), acting as the State partner. In addition to the U.S. Department of the Interior/National Park Service, other federal partners for historic preservation activities include the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the U.S. Departments of Defense, U.S. Department of Transportation, and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-2 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

60 National Register The National Register of Historic Places is the country s official list of historically significant properties. Properties eligible for the register generally retain their historic appearance, are at least fifty years old, and have the potential to be documented as historically or architecturally significant at either the local, state, or national level. The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archeology, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The National Register is administered by the National Park Service. The SHPO, also known as the Cultural Resources Division of the Kansas Historical Society, administers the nomination procedures for the National Register of Historic Places in Kansas. Federal Preservation Tax Incentives Federal legislation provides for tax incentives to encourage the preservation and rehabilitation of historic properties. In 1976, the 20 % Rehabilitation Tax Credit Program began and has since become one of the federal government s most successful and costeffective community revitalization programs. The Internal Revenue Code and the Department of the Treasury Regulations provide for income and estate tax deductions for charitable contributions of partial interest in historic property, principally in the form of preservation/conservation easements. Preservation tax incentives are available for qualified projects that the National Park Service designates as a certified rehabilitation of a certified historic structure. A certified historic structure is any building that is listed individually in the National Register of Historic Places or located in a National Register historic district and identified as contributing to the district. The 20 percent federal rehabilitation tax credit applies to owners and some lessees of income-producing National Register properties. The law also permits depreciation of such improvements over 27½ years for a rental residential property and over 31½ years for a nonresidential property. The rehabilitated building must be subject to depreciation. In exchange for the tax credits, the rehabilitation work must comply with the Secretary of the Interior s Standards for Rehabilitation. The SHPO functions as the intermediary between the project sponsors and the National Park Service, as well as processing applications for the State Rehabilitation Tax Credit. The SHPO provides applicants with technical information and recommends appropriate preservation treatments and methods. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-3 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

61 Preservation Tax Incentives reward private investment in rehabilitating historic properties such as offices, rental housing, and retail stores. Abandoned or under-used schools, warehouses, factories, churches, retail stores, apartments, hotels, houses, and offices in many cities have been restored to life in a manner that retains their historic character. The Preservation Tax Incentives have also helped to create moderate and low-income housing in historic buildings. Since the 20% tax credit began in 1976, the National Park Service (NPS) has administered it in partnership with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and with State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs). To date tens of thousands of rehabilitation projects have been approved, representing billions of dollars in private investment. Certified Local Government Program The Certified Local Government Program is a preservation partnership between local, state and national governments focused on promoting historic preservation at the grass roots level. The program is jointly administered by the National Park Service (NPS) and the State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs) in each state, with each local community working through a certification process to become recognized as a Certified Local Government (CLG). CLGs then become an active partner in the Federal Historic Preservation Program and the opportunities it provides. Through the CLG process, the local government can assume a leadership role in the preservation of its historic resources, have a formal role in the National Register nomination process, participate in the establishment of state historic preservation objectives, and receive technical and advisory services from the SHPO. Assistance includes development of a preservation ordinance and a qualified preservation commission, as well as establishment of a survey and inventory system, which are all prerequisites for participation. One of the most significant benefits of being a Certified Local Government (CLGs) is the ability to compete annually for 10 percent of the State's federal historic preservation funds to carry out preservation functions in the CLG community. Project Review and Compliance Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires Federal undertakings be reviewed for their impact on historic and cultural resources. The SHPO staff review approximately two thousand projects a year in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings for potential effects on the State's historic and cultural resources. This includes all federal or federally funded, licensed, permitted, or approved undertakings that may have an effect on properties listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-4 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

62 Save America s Treasures Save America's Treasures (SAT) is a federal program created in 1998 to award grants to Federal agencies, non-profits, government entities, and Indian tribes to "contribute to the preservation of [...] prehistoric and historic resources and give maximum encouragement to organizations and individuals undertaking preservation by private means." This program is administered by the National Park Service in partnership with the President's Committee on the Arts and the Humanities, the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the Institute of Museum and Library Services. Preserve America Preserve America is a federal program that encourages and supports community efforts to preserve and enjoy our cultural and natural heritage. Goals of the program include a greater shared knowledge about the nation s past, strengthened regional identities and local pride, increased local participation in preserving our heritage assets, and support for the economic vitality of our communities. The program includes community and volunteer recognition, grants, and awards, as well as policy direction to federal agencies. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-5 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

63 STATE FRAMEWORK Each state has a State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) usually appointed by the Governor to administer federal preservation programs. The Cultural Resources Division of the Kansas Historical Society (KSHS) fosters the preservation of the archeological, architectural, and cultural heritage of Kansas. The Cultural Resources Division, also referred to as the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), administers the State as well as the federal preservation program within Kansas. Kansas Historical Society Cultural Resources Division Programs Public Education / Outreach An extensive public education program provides information to Kansas citizens on general preservation issues. Kansas Preservation is a free quarterly newsletter in magazine format that features articles on historic resources, historic preservation and archeology. Staff members of the Cultural Resources Division participate in workshops, seminars, and conferences as lecturers or advisors; speak to university classes, local historical societies, preservation groups, downtown organizations, local governments, etc.; respond to written and telephone requests for information; distribute technical leaflets and information; and inspect buildings to offer advice on preservation treatments. The program provides special assistance to compatible programs like the Kansas Main Street Program, the Certified Local Government Program, and their participants to insure that they are implemented in a manner conducive to proper preservation practices. Preserving Kansas is a free listserve and discussion forum for individuals interested in current topics specific to the preservation of cultural resources in Kansas. Register of Historic Kansas Places The National Register of Historic Places and the Register of Historic Kansas Places are the official lists of the cultural resources worthy of preservation in Kansas. The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archeology, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The Cultural Resources Division of the Kansas Historical Society administers the nomination procedures for both the National Register of Historic Places and the Register of Historic Kansas Places. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-6 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

64 Grants Heritage Trust Fund The Heritage Trust Fund program, enacted in 1990, awards state grants for the preservation of properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places or the Register of Historic Kansas Places. All registered properties except for those owned by the State or federal governments are eligible for these annual grants. This program finances activities often referred to as brick and mortar grants because they can be used for construction costs associated with the rehabilitation or preservation of historic buildings and structures. Professional fees may also be qualifying expenses for this grant program. Historic Preservation Fund Grants The Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) is a grant program administered by the National Park Service (NPS). Funds for the HPF program are derived from Outer Continental Shelf mineral receipts. Each year the NPS provides the SHPO with funds that finance its operations, salaries and grants. The SHPO awards grants to cities, counties, universities, Certified Local Governments (CLGs) and other eligible organizations, to help support local historic preservation activities. Ten percent of the grant funds available to the SHPO must be dedicated to CLGs. Historic Preservation Fund grants provide financial support for local preservation activities that will contribute to planning for the preservation of the built environment and archeological resources. Up to sixty percent of the cost of eligible activities can be funded through this program. Through property identification and evaluation, communities may assess their historic properties and develop plans for their recognition and preservation. Eligible activities include historic resources surveys, nominations to the National Register of Historic Places, design review guidelines, historic preservation plans and educational activities that inform the public about local historic resources and historic preservation issues and techniques. State Preservation Tax Incentives State legislation establishes a tax incentive program similar to the Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit Program. The State Rehabilitation Tax Credit program provides for tax incentives to encourage the rehabilitation of historic properties. Preservation tax incentives are available for qualified projects that the Cultural Resources Division of the Kansas Historical Society designates as a certified rehabilitation of a certified historic structure. A certified historic structure for the Kansas program is any building that is listed individually in the National Register of Historic Places or the Register of Kansas Historic Places or is located in a HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-7 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

65 National Register historic district or Register of Kansas historic district and is identified as contributing to the district. Rehabilitation projects for certified historic structures may receive a 25% Kansas tax credit for the overall cost of the rehabilitation. The Kansas tax incentive program is not restricted to income producing property and may be used by individuals to rehabilitate private residences. The State program also offers the advantage of the tax credits being transferable. The State Rehabilitation Tax Credit program can be combined with the Federal Tax Credit Program for income producing projects. When used together, the federal and state tax credits can help recapture a significant amount of eligible rehabilitation costs in tax credits. In exchange for the tax credits, the rehabilitation work must comply with the Secretary of the Interior s Standards for Rehabilitation. The SHPO functions as the intermediary between the project sponsors and the Kansas Department of Revenue, as well as processing applications for the State Rehabilitation Tax Credit. The SHPO provides applicants with technical information and recommends appropriate preservation treatments and methods. Project Review and Compliance In addition to the role of the SHPO staff to review federally funded, licensed, permitted, or approved undertakings that may have an effect on properties listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, SHPO staff is also responsible for reviewing projects for compliance with the State Preservation Law. K.S.A , as amended, titled Protective Measures of the Kansas Historical Preservation Act, identifies that any project undertaken, licensed, or permitted by the state or its political subdivisions (such as a city, county, township, school district, etc.) that will affect a historic property listed in the State or National Registers or the environs of a listed historic property must be reviewed in accordance with the state preservation laws. The environs are the context of the listed property and are typically identified as a measured five hundred foot notification area. For projects that involve properties listed in the National or Kansas Registers, the SHPO must use the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings. For projects located in the environs, the SHPO must use the Standards and Guidelines for Evaluating the Effect of Projects on Environs. The State Preservation Law allows the State Historic Preservation Officer to enter into agreements authorizing a city or county to make recommendations or to perform any or all responsibilities of the state historic preservation officer under the State Preservation Law if the City or County has enacted a comprehensive local historic preservation ordinance, established a local historic preservation board or commission and is actively engaged in a local historic preservation program. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-8 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

66 Certified Local Government Program The Certified Local Government (CLG) program is a partnership between the National Park Service, acting as the Federal Partner, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), acting as the state partner, and local government municipalities. The SHPO administers the CLG program in Kansas and works with local governments to take advantage of a leadership role in the preservation of its historic resources, have a formal role in the National Register nomination process, participate in the establishment of state historic preservation objectives, and receive technical and advisory services from the SHPO. The SHPO also administers the yearly Historic Preservation Fund grant program funded by the State's federal historic preservation funds and CLGs are eligible to compete annually for 10 percent of this fund to carry out preservation functions in their communities. Cultural Resource Survey The SHPO maintains historic property inventories for identified historic and archeological resources in Kansas. Local organizations, agencies, or individuals are encouraged (often through matching grants) to perform surveys in their own communities or regions. The office performs limited specialized inventories, trains local surveyors, provides guidance to local survey projects, and evaluates the results of survey projects. Survey and inventory activities provide information for register nomination and protection of historic and cultural resources. The Kansas SHPO has recently transitioned from a paper-based survey form to an interactive online database, the Kansas Historic Resources Inventory (KHRI). KHRI contains all of the SHPO s survey records and is fully searchable and available to the public. Users interested in submitting new surveys or updating existing survey forms can become registered and, once approved by SHPO staff, log into KHRI. There is an online tutorial for instructions on searching, becoming a registered user, and providing new information for the database. This new survey system allows for the information in the database to be updated as new information is collected. Preservation Planning The SHPO has responsibility for developing and implementing a statewide strategic management plan that addresses key critical issues in preservation. The plan assists in predicting trends affecting and impacting historic and archeological properties and guides resource management decisions and operations for the SHPO and other preservation stakeholders. The SHPO involves many organizations, agencies, and individuals in the HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-9 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

67 statewide preservation planning process. The plan is updated and revised every five years to adequately address the preservation needs of the state. The current approved plan for includes the following goals: Broaden public knowledge Strengthen advocacy Develop a statewide preservation network Integrate historic preservation practices into community planning Fund Historic Preservation Initiatives Preservation Programs Administered by other State Agencies Main Street Program The Kansas Main Street program uses a common-sense approach to tackle the complex issues of revitalizing a community s central business district, capitalizing on the downtown s history and identifying the resources of the community itself. The state program, which started in 1985, provides management training, consultation visits, local program evaluation, design assistance, business enhancement strategies, incentive dollars, and ongoing training in the National Main Street Center s four-point approach organization, promotion, design, and economic restructuring. The Kansas Department of Commerce Rural Development Division manages the Kansas Main Street program. Kansas Neighborhood Revitalization Act The Kansas Neighborhood Revitalization Act allows the governing body of any municipality or county to pass an ordinance designating an area within that municipality as a "Neighborhood Revitalization Area" if it finds that "the rehabilitation, conservation or redevelopment of the area is necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare of the residents of the municipality." Kansas also has constitutional and legislative provisions that allow state and local governments to enact preservation legislation. The state and federal supreme courts have upheld these powers. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-10 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

68 LOCAL FRAMEWORK Lawrence s historic preservation programs include the study, identification, protection, restoration, and rehabilitation of buildings, structures, objects, districts, areas, and sites significant in the history, architecture, archeology, or culture of Lawrence, the State of Kansas, or the nation. On November 15, 1988 the Lawrence City Commission unanimously approved the Historic Preservation Ordinance in order to help protect and restore its historical and architectural assets. (An earlier attempt to write and pass a historic preservation ordinance for Lawrence failed in 1983.) Many local citizens consider the ordinance to be a direct response to the protest aroused by the dramatic demolition of eight historic houses on June 27, Those structures were in the 800 block of Kentucky Street on lots acquired by the Douglas County State Bank for a parking lot to support their new bank building. The ordinance, now identified as Chapter 22 of the Code of the City of Lawrence Conservation of Historic Resources Code, calls for the establishment of local historic districts and local landmarks, the Lawrence Historic Resources Commission and the requirement of maintaining a preservation specialist on staff. The principal goals of the ordinance are to encourage the preservation of Lawrence's historic and architectural resources. The Lawrence/Douglas County Metropolitan Planning Office administers Lawrence s preservation programs. One of the strongest protections the city s preservation ordinance offers for historic buildings and archaeological remains is the power to designate and regulate changes to historic properties. In doing so, the city joins more than 8,000 local jurisdictions nationwide that have historic preservation ordinances. The City of Lawrence is a Certified Local Government (CLG). As such, its historic preservation program meets federal and state guidelines. The designation also allows the city to compete for a pool of grant funds available each year to CLGs in the state. Lawrence Historic Resources Commission Established as part of the city s Historic Preservation Ordinance, the Lawrence Historic Resources Commission is the only entity specifically created and mandated to identify and conserve the distinctive historic and architectural resources of the city of Lawrence. The city established the Lawrence Historic Resources Commission in response to rising public concern for the irreplaceable loss to the community of significant historic structures and sites. The City of Lawrence s Historic Resources Commission (HRC) is a seven-member, city-appointed advisory board to the City Commission. Three of the members on the commission are required to come from preservation-related backgrounds (architecture, architectural history, history, landscape architecture, and planning). Four of the members on the commission are required to come from a diversity of professions or be lay persons HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-11 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

69 with demonstrated interest, knowledge, and training in fields closely related to historic preservation (history, architecture, landscape architecture, architectural history, archeology, planning, real estate, law, finance, building trades, urban design, and geography.) The Lawrence Historic Resources Commission is responsible for: identifying distinctive architectural characteristics and historic resources of the city that are representative of the city and that are representative of elements of the city's cultural, social, economic, political, and architectural history; fostering civic pride in the past accomplishments of the city; conserving and improving the value of property in and around designated historic landmarks and historic districts; fostering and encouraging preservation, restoration, and rehabilitation of structures, areas, and neighborhoods; and educating the public as to what is historic and how the preservation of these resources can benefit the individual property owners and the community at large. Figure 2. Preservation Partners HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-12 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

70 PRESERVATION NETWORK FEDERAL / NATIONAL PUBLIC NATIONAL PARK SERVICE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION PRIVATE NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION PRESERVATION ACTION NATIONAL ALLIANCE OF STATEWIDE ORGANIZATIONS AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR STATE AND LOCAL HISTORY ASSOCIATION FOR PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY SOCIETY FOR AMERICAN ARCHAEOLOGY STATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICES (SHPO) REGIONAL OFFICES FOR THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT /LAWRENCE S HISTORIC RESOURCES COMMISSION KANSAS PRESERVATION ALLIANCE REGIONAL OFFICES FOR THE NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION LOCAL PRESERVATION AND HISTORY ORGANIZATIONS AND NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS LAWRENCE PRESERVATION ALLIANCE DOUGLAS COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY LAWRENCE ASSOCIATION OF NEIGHBORHOODS (LAN) HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-13 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

71 PRESERVATION ACTIVITY OVERVIEW Living with History, the title of the 1984 historic preservation plan referred to the fact that residents of Lawrence and visitors acknowledged the town's historic character while enjoying the prosperity of dynamic economic growth at the same time. That earlier theme is more relevant today. In 2011, the historic preservation movement in Lawrence and Douglas County clearly demonstrates the principle that successful communities recognize, protect, and benefit from their history as manifested in historic architectural resources, urban plans, and cultural landscapes. Prosperity has threatened historic buildings, districts, and landscapes. Inappropriate rehabilitation and demolition threaten historic buildings. Economic pressure to intensify land use threatens historic districts. In the unincorporated areas of Douglas County, urban sprawl and a decline in agricultural land use threaten rural historic resources. Preservation Organizations Several organizations in Lawrence and rural Douglas County have direct or indirect interests in historic preservation. Established in 1933, the Douglas County Historical Society is the oldest and most broadly representative historical organization in the county. Similar organizations include the Clinton Lake Historical Society, Eudora Historical Society, Lecompton Historical Society, and the Santa Fe Trail Historical Society. These organizations have broad interests in community history, maintain archival and artifact collections, and own historic properties. The Lawrence Preservation Alliance (LPA) was formed in May 1984 to buy a dilapidated house in the Oread neighborhood that was threatened by demolition. Three months later, the LPA sold the house to a new buyer who rehabilitated the building as a personal residence. Beginning in January 1985, the organization announced its goals of establishing a revolving fund to purchase threatened buildings, promoting survey and nomination of significant buildings, sponsoring walking tours, and assisting in finding a new use for the threatened Union Pacific Railroad Depot in North Lawrence. (Contrasting with the success and stability of the Lawrence Preservation Alliance, the Douglas County Preservation Alliance, founded in April 1991 to undertake preservation activities in rural areas of the County, disbanded in 2001.) LPA preservation activities include: o o o 1984 purchase and resale of a threatened house at 947 Louisiana. T 1985 purchase and resale of the Wiggins house at 840 West 21st with eventual listing of the property on the Kansas State Register 1986 Purchase of the Priestly house at 1505 Kentucky to save it from HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-14 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

72 o o o o demolition and nomination of the property to the National Register 1987 purchase of the threatened Benedict house at 923 Tennessee, nomination of the property to the National Register, and rehabilitation of the building 1997 purchase of the property at 1113 Pennsylvania and sale three years later 2000 provision of a loan to move a threatened house at 2201 Louisiana into the country Rhode Island Street Partnership with Tenants to Homeowners and Douglas County for rehabilitation of the structure. Historic preservation is also important to neighborhood associations in Lawrence. These associations organized as the Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods (LAN) to assist in the development of new neighborhood associations, encourage cooperation among neighborhoods, and identify more efficient ways to evaluate the effects of city policies, services, and programs on neighborhoods. Generally, LAN has strongly supported historic preservation and has incorporated a policy statement on Historic Preservation into their Policy Document. Other organizations have objectives related to historic preservation but extend their programs beyond Douglas County. The Kansas Preservation Alliance (KPA) was founded in 1979 and is a statewide, not-forprofit corporation dedicated to supporting the preservation of Kansas heritage through education, advocacy, cooperation with like-minded individuals and groups, and participation in the preservation of historic structures and places. KPA works with the SHPO to plan and implement the yearly State Historic Preservation Conference, publishes a quarterly newsletter, and promotes preservation education through an awards program and a yearly endangered places list. Established in 1989, the Kansas Land Trust is a non-profit organization that protects and preserves lands of ecological, historical, scenic, agricultural, and recreational significance. The Trust works with landowners, other organizations, and individuals to preserve natural features in Kansas. Although many of the founding members lived in or near Douglas County, the organization's mission extends throughout Kansas. As a land trust, the organization uses a variety of conservation techniques but primarily accepts conservation easements from willing landowners. The Professional Archaeologists of Kansas (PAK) goal is to encourage and facilitate communication about the historic and prehistoric cultural heritage of Kansas and the importance of protecting and preserving archaeological resources for future generations. The organization maintains a website, administers a listserv, and sponsors Kansas HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-15 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

73 Archaeology Month. This event offers varied programming in April of each year, including speakers, site visits, artifact identification days, and museum exhibits across the state. The Kansas Anthropological Association (KAA) has a long tradition of preservation work in the state. Its primary goal is the involvement and education of avocational archeologists in the preservation process. The Kansas Archeology Training Program hosts a field school that is a multi-activity program providing avocational archeologists with professional advice on the location, recording, interpretation, preservation, and publication of information on archeological sites. The primary activity is an annual two-week field school carried out in partnership with the KSHS. The KATP also administers a certification program that allows individuals to receive training and earn certification in areas such as site survey, excavation, laboratory work, and public outreach. The Kansas Barn Alliance is committed to researching and preserving barns throughout the state. The Alliance hosts workshops throughout the state to raise awareness about this threatened property type, to promote the National Register of Historic Places and rehabilitation tax credits and grants, and to provide networking and educational opportunities to rural advocates. The Kansas Sampler Foundation is a public non-profit 501(C)(3) organization committed to preserving, sustaining, and growing rural culture by educating Kansans about Kansas and by networking and supporting rural communities. The organization educates Kansans through the annual Kansas Sampler Festival and a variety of programs including the Kansas Explorers Club, the 8 Wonders of Kansas contests, the Get Kansas! blog, and the We Kan! network. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-16 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

74 Preservation Activities Recent historic preservation activities in Lawrence and Douglas County can be summarized in terms of education and promotion, survey and nomination, planning and zoning, and economic development. However, as preservation activity has become more diverse and extended into new areas, issues and conflicts have also developed. Education The 2001 Kansas Preservation Plan stated that, "... enhanced public knowledge of practices and techniques... " is the key to successful historic and cultural preservation efforts. Making information accessible to the general public through workshops and publications encourages public involvement in historic preservation. 1 The 2011 State Preservation Plan reiterates this sentiment by identifying the first goal of the plan as Broaden public knowledge. The School of Architecture, Design and Planning, University of Kansas offers formal education in historic preservation. Classes for students in architecture and planning include preservation planning, preservation economics, American architectural history and American vernacular architecture, as well as special studies guided by faculty members. Since the mid-1980s, the Lawrence Preservation Alliance has provided educational programs including walking tours and educational lectures for the general public. In 2009, the LPA initiated a new awards program to recognize individuals and groups who have made a significant contribution to historic preservation in Lawrence. The Lawrence Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB) promotes heritage tourism and historic preservation through various driving and walking tour brochures. The CVB provides brochures directing visitors to historic sites in Lawrence and Douglas County including a "In Plain View, A Self Guided Tour of Old East Lawrence;" "Quantrill's Raid: The Lawrence Massacre;" "House Styles of Old West Lawrence;" "Historic Cemeteries Tour of Lawrence;" Historic Trails of Douglas County; and Downtown Lawrence." Many of these walking tours are now available as itours. In December 2001, the Douglas County and Lawrence City Commissions jointly appointed the Lawrence/Douglas County Heritage Area Commission to study the possibility of seeking National Heritage Area designation. A National Heritage Area is a defined cultural landscape designated by Congress where natural, cultural, historic, and scenic resources combine to form a nationally distinctive landscape arising from patterns of human activity shaped by 1 The Kansas Preservation Plan. Planning for the Future: Historic Preservation Policy, (Topeka: Kansas State Historical Society, 2001), 4. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-17 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

75 geography. These patterns make Heritage Areas representative of the national experience. The National Park Service supports National Heritage Areas with funding, training, technical assistance, and recognition for community efforts. 2 In 2003, a Heritage Summit Meeting was held in Lawrence and included representation from twenty Kansas and Missouri communities. Freedom s Frontier National Heritage Area was established as a National Heritage Area on October 12, In February 2008, citizens began working together to create a management plan for the area. The management plan was approved by the National Park Service in June Freedom s Frontier National Heritage Area consists of 42 counties in western Missouri and eastern Kansas. Archaeological Investigations Archaeological investigations provide practically the only data about the pre-history of humans in the area of Lawrence and Douglas County. The county s two major drainage systems, the Kansas and Wakarusa rivers, created a topography that was well suited for human habitation. There is considerable evidence of past human use of many of the stream valleys of Douglas County. As archaeologists Lauren Ritterbush and India Hesse pointed out in their 1996 study, "The high archaeological potential of Douglas County is exciting, yet with it comes the need to actively evaluate and manage the finite and fragile resources that provide us with one of the very few sets of data about our human past." 3 Formal reports of archaeological sites in the county began in This work related to planning for construction of Clinton Reservoir by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Additional investigations occurred in the project area between 1966 and For preservation planning purposes, the most instructive archaeology project was the 1996 survey completed by Ritterbush and Hesse. The archaeologists recommended the continuation of efforts to identify archaeological remains in Douglas County. They conducted an intensive archaeological survey of selected parcels of land in Douglas County to identify and record archaeological sites. The goal of the project was to inventory cultural resources on a "... sample of lands having high potential for development." Investigators emphasized prehistoric (rather than historic) archaeological resources because "... in most cases prehistoric archaeological sites offer our only source of information about more than ten thousand years of human occupation of North America." The work completed represented a relatively small sample of potentially significant resources. Landowner concerns limited access to some properties. The archaeologists gave preference to survey tracts with good ground visibility and high potential for archaeological sites stream 2 Judy Hart, "Planning for and Preserving Cultural Resources through National Heritage Areas," Cultural Resource Management 7 (2000), Lauren Ritterbush and India Hesse, Douglas County (Kansas) Archaeological Survey (Lawrence; Museum of Anthropology, University of Kansas, May 1996), 6. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-18 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

76 terraces and areas reported by landowners, farmers, or collectors to be associated with artifacts. As the investigators reported, they inspected "... approximately 1,056 acres of land within thirty-five survey tracts. The effort recorded fifteen new sites and revisited seventeen previously recorded sites. Twenty-four of these sites contain one or more prehistoric components. Nine contain historic components." Development projects destroyed four previously recorded prehistoric sites; destruction of one site occurred during the survey. 4 The archaeologists recommended testing through excavation of twelve prehistoric sites. At least five of these had high potential for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. In addition, the archaeologists recommended continued survey of priority areas, evaluation of potentially significant sites, and designation of significant sites in the National Register of Historic Places. The survey project included a public education component a presentation describing archaeology in Douglas County prehistoric cultures in Kansas entitled "Archaeology in Our Own Backyard." Presently, there are over 200 archaeological sites in Douglas County formally recorded with the Kansas State Historical Society and the Museum of Anthropology at the University of Kansas. Currently, the identification of archaeological sites continues to be conducted on a project-by-project basis. Information from past surveys and any subsequent surveys must be considered in the comprehensive planning and development process. When warranted, the survey information should be evaluated through further investigation involving excavation of selected sites that are most likely to yield significant information. Survey and Nomination The 1984 historic preservation plan recommended systematic survey of Lawrence's historic neighborhoods. Collecting and evaluating information through the survey is the fundamental step in historic preservation planning. Typically, Historic Preservation Fund grants to the city from the NPS through the SHPO fund surveys and nominations. Lawrence received Historic Preservation Fund grants in 1990, 1991, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009 and The grants have funded the Resurvey of Old West Lawrence, development of the statement of significance for the Old West Lawrence Historic District, the Downtown Lawrence Survey, the East Lawrence Survey, the development of Environs Review Guidelines and a process for defining the environs, the Survey of North Lawrence, the Survey of South Lawrence, hosting the statewide Preservation Conference, development of design guidelines for the Old West Lawrence Historic District, the archeological survey of Blanton s Crossing, the Historic 4 Ibid., 1-6. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-19 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

77 Preservation Plan Comprehensive Plan element, National Register of Historic Places District nominations (Lawrence s Downtown Historic District, North Rhode Island Street Historic District, South Rhode Island and New Hampshire Streets Historic District, Pinckney I Historic District, Pinckney II Historic District, Breezedale Historic District, and Oread Historic District), the Downtown Design Guidelines, the survey of South Massachusetts Street, the employment of a Design Review Intern, the employment of a Historic Preservation Planning intern, preservation education projects, and a Historic Resources Survey of the area North of the Stadium. Planning and Zoning Historic preservation was an element in the "Horizon 2020" comprehensive plan approved in Of the twelve key goals in the plan, two are most relevant for historic preservation. The plan... encourages the identification, protection, and adaptive reuse of the wide diversity of historic buildings, structures, sites, and archaeological sites that can be found in Lawrence and Douglas County. Considering historic preservation issues in combination with other land use decisions assures the preservation of historic resources but also fosters the image, identity, and economic development goals in the Comprehensive Plan." Secondly, the Horizon 2020 comprehensive plan promotes the maintenance of a strong and clear distinction between the urban and rural character of Lawrence-Douglas County. To further this goal, the plan also defined areas anticipated to receive new urban growth near existing urban areas and established parameters for non-agricultural development in Douglas County. 5 Economic Activity In 1985 the Downtown Lawrence Association sponsored the Lawrence application to participate in the National Trust for Historic Preservation Main Street program. This program integrated business associations, coordinated marketing and historic preservation to stimulate economic development. Main Street cities make a commitment to hire a fulltime downtown coordinator of these activities for one to three years. Lawrence participated in the Main Street program for several years. Downtown Lawrence, Inc (DLI) is a not-for-profit membership organization created to promote the interests of the Downtown business district. DLI has over 100 members including individually-owned specialty stores, national retail chains, restaurants, bars, hair salons, and professional businesses. The mission of DLI is. to preserve, protect, and promote Downtown Lawrence as the retail, service and professional, governmental, entertainment, and social center of our community. 5 "Horizon HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-20 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

78 In May 1997 the owners of the Ludington-Thacher house, a National Register property and one of the landmark residences in Lawrence, received a $60,000 grant from the Kansas Heritage Trust Fund for brick restoration. This was the first grant in Lawrence to a private property owner. Two other important economic events for historic preservation in Lawrence were set in the preservation of the English Lutheran Church building in downtown Lawrence and the Union Pacific Railroad Depot building in North Lawrence. In 1991, attorneys for the Kansas State Historical Society and the LPA presented arguments to the State Court of Appeals on behalf of preservation of the church building. They argued that the property owner, Allen Press, had not considered reasonable and prudent alternatives to the planned demolition. Eventually, Allen Press sold the building and the new owner rehabilitated it as an office building. Litigation over the church established important precedents for due process in considering demolition and the community interest in significant historic buildings. A prominent preservation success occurred in February 1990 when the Union Pacific Railroad presented the key to the historic depot to the Mayor of Lawrence. This symbolized the donation of the building to the city so that fundraising for renovation could begin. The issue of community interest in the depot versus railroad policy arose when the Union Pacific announced plans in 1984 to demolish the depot within sixty days. In response, a "Save the Depot Task Force" organized. After years of negotiations and planning (including the possibility of moving the masonry building), the task force convinced the community and the railroad company to preserve, rehabilitate, and re-use this landmark building was an exceptional year for preservation in Lawrence with six historic districts listed in the National Register of Historic Places and the Register of Historic Kansas Places. All of the contributing properties in these districts became eligible for the State Rehabilitation Tax Credit Program and the income producing properties became eligible for the Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit Program. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-21 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

79 Figure 3. Chronology of Historic Preservation Activities 1984 Lawrence Preservation Alliance incorporated "Living With History," Lawrence Historic Preservation Plan recommends survey plan, nominations to the State and National registers, and historic preservation ordinance. Union Pacific Depot threatened with demolition Houses demolished in 800 block Kentucky Street "Heart of Oread Survey" completed Lawrence Historic Preservation Ordinance approved Kansas Land Trust organized City of Lawrence accepts Union Pacific Depot property. City of Lawrence initiates Old West Lawrence re-survey, survey program Lawsuit leads to sale and rehabilitation of old English Lutheran Church Kaw Valley Heritage Association organized Kansas Historic Preservation Conference, Lawrence Horizon 2020 Comprehensive Plan recommends historic preservation plan Douglas County Preservation Alliance disbanded. National Heritage Area Commission appointed Heritage Summit Meeting was held in Lawrence 2004 Six historic districts listed in the National Register of Historic Places 2006 Freedom s Frontier National Heritage Area established 2009 The management plan for Freedom s Frontier National Heritage Area approved by the National Park Service in June. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-22 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

80 THE IMPORTANCE OF LOCAL PROGRAMS FOR PRESERVATION AND PLANNING The development of economic incentives and strategies making money through historic preservation is the most important new direction in the evolution of historic preservation programs. In the past decade, the use of historic preservation as an economic development strategy had a dramatic impact on the economies of America s cities and towns. As the leading expert in this field, Donovan Rypkema, notes, "... the commitment to downtown revitalization and reuse of downtown's historic buildings may be the most effective single act of fiscal responsibility a local government can take." 6 Consider these facts. Many more historic buildings merit being saved than can possibly be museums. There are not nearly enough tax dollars to save all the buildings that ought to be preserved. Finally, most historic buildings are not owned by historic preservationists. 7 Consequently, the future of historic resources requires an economic justification. For most historic buildings, preservation has to pay for itself and it can. If we want to attract capital and investment in our community, we must differentiate it from anywhere else. As Rypkema notes, "... it is our built environment that expresses, perhaps better than anything else, our diversity, our identity, our individuality, our differentiation." 8 In the twenty-first century, historic preservation is a valuable economic development strategy for successful communities. City of Lawrence Programs While state and federal programs provide targeted assistance, historic preservation is basically a local activity. In Lawrence, the most immediate opportunity to use economic incentives is provided by Article 10 of the Historic Preservation Ordinance. To make the preservation of historically significant structures more economically feasible, the ordinance provides for special use permits, preservation easements, exceptions to the city building code, a preservation fund, and the Historic Conservation Award program. For example, to encourage adaptive re-use of historic buildings, the Historic Resources Commission may recommend to the Lawrence-Douglas County Planning Commission that a special use permit be granted to the landmark property or listed property to allow other uses which are not allowed in the existing zoning category. This allows for appropriate functions such as bed and breakfast accommodations, house museums, art galleries, and other special uses. Preservation façade easements on buildings designated as landmarks 6 Rypkema, "Economics and Historic Preservation, Rypkema, The Economics of Historic Preservation, 1. 8 Ibid., 44. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-23 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

81 may be acquired by the city or other groups through purchase, donation, or condemnation. A preservation easement would include any easement, covenant, or condition running with the land designed to preserve or maintain the significant features of such landmarks. An easement gives a partial interest in the historic property to the city or a qualifying organization. The owner retains use of the entire property but agrees to give up part of the rights inherent in property ownership (the right to change the façade, for example) in return for favorable tax treatment. An additional incentive to encourage the rehabilitation of historic buildings exceptions to the building code may be available to owners of landmarks and buildings within historic districts. One of the most important incentives mentioned in the ordinance, which has not been utilized, is the establishment of a Preservation Fund. The City Commission determines how the fund is administered. The city may apply for, receive, and place in the fund any federal, state, local, or private gifts, grants, fees, or bequests. Also, the City Commission may budget and incorporate City revenues into the fund. The Preservation Fund could be used to purchase landmarks or properties located in a historic district. It could be used to accept preservation easements, to make grants or loans for preservation and rehabilitation of landmarks or properties in a historic district, as well as to make grants or loans to organizations to achieve one or more of the purposes of the Historic Preservation Ordinance. The fund could be used for the maintenance of landmarks or properties in a historic district. Finally, the preservation fund could be used for reasonable costs associated with the purchase of property, the purchase and enforcement of easements, and the sale of property. The city code authorizes the Historic Resources Commission to recognize outstanding projects and individual contributions to historic preservation in Lawrence through the annual Paul Wilson Awards program. While the awards program does not provide direct financial assistance, it does honor projects that are valuable to the community, and that publicity may attract additional investment in historic preservation. Neighborhood Planning and Community Development In Lawrence, the Community Development Division administers several programs that can assist in the rehabilitation of historic properties. These are intended to benefit low-tomoderate-income homeowners. The Comprehensive Rehabilitation Program provides loans up to $25,000 to bring the property up to rehabilitation standards. A maximum of 50 percent of the loan may be forgiven over a seven-year period if the owner continues to occupy the home. Emergency loans, furnace loans, and weatherization programs are also available. The Home Owners Out of Tenants (HOOT) program provides an opportunity for low- and moderate-income, first-time homeowner families to purchase a home. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-24 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

82 The Kansas Neighborhood Revitalization Act is an additional tool available to the city for the promotion of neighborhood revitalization. The act is specifically aimed at the preservation of historic or architecturally significant areas, the elimination of abandoned houses and properties through rehabilitation, and/or the construction of new improvements. It provides a tax rebate incentive program based on the increased valuation of improvements. This act requires participation by other taxing jurisdictions. In Lawrence, the city would receive 24 percent of the total levy; Unified School District 497, 52 percent; and Douglas County, 24 percent. The City Commission must approve and implement a plan for any neighborhood revitalization area by designating areas, adopting a plan for each area, and determining the criteria, standards, and eligibilities for rebate of the tax increments. The goal is the rehabilitation, conservation, or redevelopment of an area as necessary to protect the public health, safety, or welfare of the residents of the city. Revitalization plans and the rebates can apply to commercial or residential property. Douglas County would serve as administrator of the Neighborhood Revitalization Trust Fund, which would hold increased revenues for the rebates. While the Revitalization Act is useful, implementation would require negotiation and agreement about the program among the City Commission, County Commission, and School Board. The East Lawrence Neighborhood Revitalization Plan outlined other economic incentives for neighborhood conservation. Important goals in the plan that could apply to almost any older neighborhood or district were to preserve existing physical landmarks, support neighborhood institutions and activity centers, and protect and strengthen neighborhood businesses. Incentives related to residential property rehabilitation included property tax abatement, revolving loan funds for housing code improvement, rehabilitation, and emergency stabilization, as well as design assistance. For commercial properties, enterprise zones, issuance of revenue bonds, tax increment financing, rehabilitation loans, parking benefit districts, and façade improvement programs could help strengthen neighborhood businesses. 9 One of the supporting components of the East Lawrence Plan is a design guidelines study. Design guidelines are a technique to protect the character defining qualities of a given area. The guidelines are a set of uniform criteria used to evaluate the appropriateness of proposed changes to existing buildings and new construction in a defined area or "district." Guidelines do not prevent property owners from making changes, but they ensure that 9 Sabatini and Associates Architects, Patti Banks and Associates, Historic Preservation Services LLC, "East Lawrence Neighborhood Revitalization Plan," (Lawrence: Lawrence-Douglas County Planning Department, 2002), 1, HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-25 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

83 those changes maintain the unique architectural qualities of a neighborhood. 10 Design guidelines for the Old West Lawrence National Register district are now being used to protect that notable neighborhood. One of the most important set of design guidelines in current use is the "Downtown Lawrence Design Guidelines." Downtown Lawrence has distinct physical attributes that contribute to its overall character. One of these attributes is "... the diversity of structures that have been constructed over an extended period of time." Many of these structures stand as historical reminders of the development patterns of Lawrence. Therefore, the focus of the downtown design guidelines is on new construction that compliments the established character of downtown Lawrence. More than half of the goals of the Downtown Design Guidelines incorporate historic preservation methodology. These include regulation of the exterior scale, massing, design, arrangement, and materials to promote compatibility with the existing character of downtown Lawrence; development of an aesthetic appearance which complements the existing character; and the protection of the historic and architectural value of buildings or structures listed in the National, Kansas, or Lawrence registers. Finally, a central goal of the guidelines is to build upon historical character and foster diversity while meeting the goals of Horizon 2020 to increase the density of the downtown area. 11 Downtown design guidelines, like all design guidelines, are important because they inform property owners and developers about the community expectations for new construction and renovations of existing buildings. They provide detailed information and direction to property owners, developers, and interested citizens. This direction safeguards the considerable investment represented in existing buildings and new investment in a highly competitive business and/or development environment. The guidelines not only help owners and developers make decisions, but city staff uses the guidelines to review proposed projects in a consistent, fair, and equitable manner. 12 The success of the downtown design guidelines can be measured by the growing interest in designating a major portion of downtown Lawrence as a National Register historic district. Such a designation would qualify contributing properties to receive both the federal and state tax credits to offset of the cost of rehabilitation of historic buildings. Presently, the members of Downtown Lawrence, Inc. are considering these incentives as an important vehicle to assist property owners in maintaining or restoring their historic buildings Ibid., Appendix D, "Proposed Downtown Design Guidelines," (Lawrence: Downtown Design Guidelines Task Force, 2000), Ibid Chad Lawhorn, "Leaders Seek Historic District," Lawrence (KS) Journal-World. 24 April HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-26 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

84 Other Economic Incentive Programs As noted previously, the Kansas Historic Preservation Office, Kansas Historical Society, provides the most direct economic assistance. Economic programs of the office include the implementation of a statewide tax incentive program, as well as more use of the federal investment tax credit program and the Neighborhood Revitalization Act. 14 In the United States, the foundation of economic incentives for historic preservation has been the federal rehabilitation tax credit implemented in During the past decade, property owners have spent more than $30 million on rehabilitation of historic Kansas buildings through the federal tax credit program. This provides a credit equal to 20 percent of qualifying rehabilitation expenses on income-producing properties that are listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Project work must conform to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. Conforming to the standards contributes to the long-term preservation of a property's significance through the preservation of historic materials and features. In Kansas, the newest economic incentive and one of the most important for its potential is the state credit for rehabilitation of historic buildings. This program complements the federal tax credit and is modeled after programs in surrounding states such as Missouri and Colorado. It provides for a state income tax credit equal to 25 percent of qualifying rehabilitation expenses on certified historic structures. Project work must exceed $5,000. Unlike the federal tax credit program for which only income-producing properties qualify rehabilitation of non-income-producing properties (such as personal residences) will qualify for the state tax credit. In 2010, the Kansas Preservation Alliance (KPA) contracted with the Center for Urban Policy and Research at Rutgers University to produce an economic impact study of the Kansas State Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit program. The study was partially funded by a Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) grant from the Kansas Historical Society. The study concluded that a $69 million state tax credit has encouraged a four times greater amount of historic rehabilitation ($271 million). See the full report at One of the most successful programs administered by the Historic Preservation Office is the Kansas Heritage Trust Fund. This fund provides grants up to $90,000 and technical assistance for rehabilitation of properties listed in the National or Kansas registers. Individual grant awards must be matched by the recipient. A 50/50 match is required in for-profit organizations, but not-for-profit organizations or government entities must only provide a 20/80 match. Properties owned by the state and federal governments are not eligible. Since 1990, the Heritage Trust Fund has provided more than $4 million to support 14 The Kansas Preservation Plan, 5. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-27 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

85 the preservation of a variety of historic properties located in communities across the state. Many factors affected the economic success and activity in downtown Lawrence, including strong community interest, the city's commitment to infrastructure development and planning, and participation in the Main Street program in the 1980s. Established in Kansas in 1985, the Community Development Division of the Kansas Department of Commerce and Housing administers the Main Street program. It provides technical assistance not direct funding to Main Street cities and focuses on cities with a population under fifty thousand. An interested city must apply for designation, hire a manager, establish an advisory board, and develop a comprehensive program to bring about revitalization of the commercial core area. The Main Street program encourages the integration of sound economic development and historic preservation principles. Successful programs coordinate improvements to create a positive, distinctive image for downtown. The four-point Main Street program consists of the organization of public-private partnerships to create a revitalization program; the promotion of downtown as an attractive place for business, investors, and visitors; appropriate design of the physical environment; and economic restructuring that strengthens existing businesses while diversifying the town's economic base of businesses. For example, the "Downtown Lawrence Guidelines" specify appropriate design guidelines to create a distinctive physical environment for downtown Lawrence. At least three programs offered by the National Trust for Historic Preservation might be useful for preservation projects in Lawrence and rural Douglas County. The Trust provides a Preservation Services Fund that makes grants of $500 to $5,000 to non-profit organizations to initiate preservation projects. Secondly, the Barn Again program recognizes and promotes successful examples to encourage the adaptive re-use of historic barns for contemporary purposes. Finally, the Trust s Heritage Tourism program provides a multi-disciplinary approach to attracting visitors. For Kansas, these programs are administered by the NTHP Mountain/Plains regional office in Denver, Colorado. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 3-28 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

86 Historic Overview HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-1 Historic Overview

87 Chapter Four-Historic Overview PREHISTORY Historians and anthropologists organize the study of human occupation in the Central Plains according to a cultural chronology that spans the period from about 10,000 years B.C.E. to the present. Paleo-Indian hunters who roamed the area were the earliest inhabitants during the period from 10,000 to 6000 B.C.E. The Archaic people were the next major cultural group; they predominated during the period 6000 B.C.E. to A.D Later cultures included the Plains Woodland people who lived from A.D. 1 to 1000, the Plains Woodland Village Farmers who lived from A.D to 1450, and the Proto-Historic people A.D to A westward advance of Woodland people into this area during the late Archaic period also provided evidence of a parallel Early Ceramic culture, A.D. 1 to 1000; a Middle Ceramic culture, A.D to 1500 (Kansas City Hopewellian); and a Late Ceramic culture, A.D to When European explorers and traders began to travel regularly through what is now Kansas, the documentation of this cultural interaction defined the Historic Period from about A.D to the present. 26 HISTORIC NATIVE AMERICAN CULTURE The historic period of Native American culture began with the arrival of European-American traders on the Missouri River, which established an era of relatively regular contact with the native populations of northeastern Kansas. What is now Douglas County was part of the Kansa Indian Territory during the early historic period. The Kansa first lived along the Missouri River in the St. Joseph-Kansas City area. They later moved to the Big Blue River along the upper Kansas River near present-day Manhattan, and then to lower Mission Creek and the middle reaches of the Kansas River. Generally, the Kansa territory was the northeast corner of Kansas from the Missouri River to the Big Blue River and from the Nebraska line south to the Kansas River. In their last years in Kansas, the Kansa lived around Council Grove. In 1873, they moved to Indian Territory in present day Oklahoma. Investigations have not identified any Kansa camps or special activity sites in Douglas County, although they may be present. In an effort to open more land to settlement, the United States government implemented a policy of "Indian Removal" of Native American nations from the Great Lakes region and Ohio River Valley to vacant lands west of the Missouri River and the Missouri and Arkansas 26 William E. Unrau, Indians of Kansas (Topeka: Kansas State Historical Society, 1991), 9; and Patricia J. O'Brien, Archaeology in Kansas, (Lawrence: University of Kansas, 1984), HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-2 Historic Overview

88 borders. Through a series of treaties initiated in 1825, the federal government promised reserved land as a permanent home for the emigrant tribes. As a result of these treaties, the Kansa accepted a much diminished reservation west of Douglas County and the socalled "emigrant Indians" from the East received land reserves that extended into what is now Douglas County. Both the Delaware and Shawnee nations lived along the Kansas River, hunted buffalo to the west, developed farms, and raised livestock. The Delaware reservation extended along the north side of the Kansas River while the Shawnee reservation extended along the south side, including most of present-day Johnson and Douglas counties. The Delaware settled in present-day Wyandotte County in A Baptist mission established there for the Delaware continued to serve the Wyandotte nation until Shawnee tribes began arriving in the area in 1828 and more arrived in later years. Euro-Americans established a trading post for the Shawnee in Johnson County as well as Methodist Episcopal, Baptist, and Quaker missions. In 1848, missionaries established a Methodist Episcopal mission near the mouth of the Wakarusa River, possibly in extreme northeastern Douglas County. To those accustomed to exploitation and appropriation of the public lands for their own purposes, "Indian Country" offered unusual opportunities. Productive soil, potentially valuable town sites, and railroad right-of-way became more important than treaty promises. As one reporter observed when Kansas Territory opened in 1854, "It required no spirit of divination to foresee that, in opening the territory to a white population, the semi-barbarous occupancy of the finest lands by the Indians would inevitably terminate in some manner." 27 One of the steps to dispossession was the federal statute of July 22, 1854, which allowed all Indian lands to which title had been or should be extinguished to come under the very liberal provisions of the Preemption Law of Preemption meant that the actual settler on unclaimed public land had the first right to buy it from the federal government. White settlers argued that without preemption the new country would be in the hands of monopolists and not the small yeoman farmer. Besides, the land-hungry settlers insisted that the federal government could hardly expect strict compliance with the rules governing land when federal policies toward Native Americans were filled with deception. 28 The Delaware and Shawnee treaties of 1854 also stated that the emigrant tribes must allow rights-of-way for railroad development through their land. 29 During the conflicts of the territorial period and particularly after the outbreak of the Civil 27 H. Craig Miner and William E. Unrau, The End of Indian Kansas: A Study of Cultural Revolution, , (Lawrence: Regents Press of Kansas, 1978), 4. The quotation is from William Phillips, a correspondent for the New York Tribune in his book, The Conquest of Kansas, by Missouri and Her Allies. 28 Ibid.,, Ibid., 14, 27. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-3 Historic Overview

89 War, white settlers challenged Indian land claims. The emigrant tribes came under continual harassment. By 1858, reports of squatters resorting to force became increasingly common. They physically abused Indian agents and forced some to abandon their agencies. As late as 1863, Native American nations still held almost four million acres in the State. Euro-American settlers complained that the government should extinguish the Indian titles completely, not just to negotiated concessions for traders, land speculators, and railroad men. 30 The demand for public land eventually led to the removal of more than ten thousand Kickapoo, Delaware, Sac and Fox, Shawnee, Potawatomi, Kansa, Ottawa, Wyandot, Miami, and Osage, in addition to a number of smaller nations, from the State. After 1866, many Native Americans ceded their Kansas lands to the federal government and most moved to Indian Territory in what is now Oklahoma. By 1875, fewer than one thousand the Prairie Band of the Potawatomis, a few Kickapoos, and even fewer Sacs and Foxes remained. 31 HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT, From the early to the mid-nineteenth century, many Euro-American travelers and emigrants moved through the Kansas River valley along several commercial and overland emigrant trails. Both the Oregon-California and Santa Fe trails ran through what is now Douglas County. As early as the late eighteenth century, French and Spanish explorers traveled between Santa Fe and St. Louis. Eventually, the Santa Fe Trail took its name from its destination, the capital of Mexico's northernmost province. Before 1821, Spain prohibited overland trade with the United States, but after Mexican independence, trade flourished between Mexico and merchants from the United States. In March 1825, Congress authorized a survey of a road from Missouri to New Mexico and negotiations with Indian nations for safe passage across the plains. The survey party signed treaties with the Osage and Kansa for permission to mark the road and use it freely. At first, traders left from Franklin, then Fort Osage, and, later, Independence and Westport in Missouri and Leavenworth in Kansas. Most of the trail branches joined near what is now the town of Gardner in southwestern Johnson County, Kansas. The Santa Fe Trail overland route from Missouri, entered Kansas in Johnson County, passed the Shawnee Indian missions, and followed a route through Douglas, Osage, and Lyon counties to Council Grove and on westward to Santa Fe. 30 Ibid., 24, Ibid., 5. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-4 Historic Overview

90 Not only did Euro-Americans leave the western frontier of the United States to trade goods for silver species in Mexico, during the 1830s, Mexicans brought in silver amounting to as much as $300,000 per trip and furs and mules to trade for manufactured goods. The trade was very profitable for American merchants. In Commerce of the Prairies, Santa Fe trader, Josiah Gregg, reported that the volume of trade between 1822 and 1843 usually produced profits from 20 to 40 percent. During the Mexican War of , the Santa Fe Trail served as a military road. After the war, the U.S. military began to establish forts near the trail to protect travelers and to maintain peace among the various Indian nations. During the 1850s, commerce and emigration increased. In 1860, more than three thousand freight wagons used the trail. Six years later, the number grew to between five thousand and six thousand wagons. The volume of trade encouraged railroad developers and work began on the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railroad in The company completed the Kansas section in late December Overland stage and wagon freighting on the trail ended after 1878 when the railroad line reached Santa Fe, New Mexico. 32 Compared to the Santa Fe Trail, the Oregon Trail "... was known primarily as the emigrant's highway." It also served military and commercial traffic. The Oregon Trail was the longest overland trail, stretching from near Independence, Missouri to Oregon or California. It was never a single route but consisted of a series of alternate routes. In Kansas, the major routes began with the Santa Fe Trail at Independence or Westport, Missouri, diverged from the Santa Fe Trail near present-day Gardner, Kansas, and followed the Kansas River valley, turned northwest through present-day Westmoreland, crossed the Blue River near Marysville, and continued on into Nebraska. 33 In Kansas, the route originated at the landing at Fort Leavenworth and also passed through or near the towns of Olathe, Gardner, Eudora, Lawrence, Big Springs, Topeka, Silver Lake, Rossville, St. Marys, and Westmoreland. From the 1840s through the 1860s, an estimated 250,000 emigrants, prospectors, traders, and other travelers used this overland route to get to the Rocky Mountains, Utah, Oregon, and California. Already significant by the mid-1840s, traffic escalated with the discovery of gold in California in At first, travelers had to ford the rivers and streams. As travel increased, several individuals started ferries. In 1850, guidebooks listed five ferries or bridges along the Oregon Trail in Kansas. Activity on the Oregon Trail declined as the railroads built transcontinental lines in the 1860s and 1870s. 32 Kansas Preservation Plan: Study Unit on the Period of Exploration and Settlement (Topeka: 1987), Ibid., HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-5 Historic Overview

91 The Kansas River was another important travel route through what is now Kansas. Early traders moved up and down the river in pirogues or keelboats. The first steamboats traveled the Kansas River in In the spring of 1855, several boats docked at Lawrence. This supported the belief that the settlement could become the western freight terminal for the new territory. The belief was contradicted by extreme variations in the flow of the Kansas River. The river was barely navigable in Drought in 1857 and again in 1860 made steamboat travel impossible. HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT OF THE KANSAS TERRITORY AND DOUGLAS COUNTY After the Mexican War, the issue of the expansion of slavery into thousands of acres of new territory created a national controversy. In 1854, Congress passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which opened the unsettled region west of the Missouri river and the western boundary of Missouri to white settlement. Departing from the earlier Missouri Compromise, Congress mandated that whether the former "Indian Country" would be slave or free would be determined by settlers' votes. Abolitionists and other opponents of the extension of slavery organized to make Kansas a free state. Southerners, especially residents of Missouri, expected that their neighboring territory would become a slave state. The abolitionists of New England assisted anti-slavery emigrants planning to settle in Kansas. In July 1854, the first emigrant party left Boston to establish a town some forty miles west of the junction of the Kansas and the Missouri rivers. The emigrants named their newly established town Lawrence. Before the end of the year, five emigrant parties, including a total of about five hundred people, made their way to Kansas and Lawrence. The emigrant aid company sponsored groups that traveled to Topeka, Manhattan, and several other towns in 1854 and When pro-slavery voters elected a territorial legislature in the spring of 1855, free-staters organized a rival legislature. Both provisional governments petitioned Congress to be admitted to the Union. For the next several years, the political situation remained confused. During the years from 1855 through 1857, frequent violent outbreaks in eastern Kansas, particularly in Douglas County, made national headlines. Raids by pro-slavery Missouri forces and abolitionist groups occurred on both sides of the Missouri-Kansas border and resulted in murders and the destruction of property. Because of such incidents, the territory became known as Bleeding Kansas." By the end of 1857, the number of free-staters was increasing and the presence of federal troops and effective gubernatorial leadership began to control the violence. Many Missourians left the territory and in the fall of 1857, free-state voters gained control of the territorial legislature. Their leaders held a convention in 1859 HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-6 Historic Overview

92 at Wyandotte where they drafted the constitution under which Kansas, in January 1861, entered the Union as a free state. 34 Some of the earliest towns founded in Douglas County were Lawrence, Franklin, and Lecompton. Located a few miles southeast of Lawrence, above the bottomlands where the Wakarusa joins the Kansas River, Franklin was the first stagecoach stop west of Westport, Missouri. When Kansas became a territory, many Missourians moved into Kansas, and Franklin became a town popular with Southern sympathizers. Other early Douglas County communities were Black Jack, Big Springs, and Lone Star. 35 HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT OF LAWRENCE 36 Settlement Period, From the first year of settlement in 1854, Lawrence was a "planned community with metropolitan aspirations." Following the early years of settlement, activity during the "citybuilding" period from 1864 to 1873 defined the central commercial axis of Lawrence and the related network of residential districts. Industrial development in the late nineteenth century and the growth of the University of Kansas in the early twentieth century were also important determinants of the urban environment. For each period, the local population, institutions, activities, and artifacts formed a characteristic pattern. 37 A majority of the historic buildings surviving in Lawrence date to the periods of slow, gradual growth and replacement dating from 1873 to This pattern contrasts with the rapid and extensive growth of the city-building period ( ) and the modern period of prosperity, dramatic population growth, and building construction from 1945 to the present. The interpretation of significance in local history, then, must account for this tension between continuity, growth, and decline. Agents for the New England Aid Company, an anti-slavery organization formed to counter 34 Ibid.,, Daniel C. Fitzgerald, Ghost Towns of Kansas (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1988), 73, 71-86; and Daniel C. Fitzgerald, Faded Dreams: More Ghost Towns of Kansas (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, c1994), Interpretation of the historical development of Lawrence is based on the chronology in a 1984 study, "Living with History: A Historic Preservation Plan for Lawrence, Kansas," by Dale Nimz. This study outlined a distinctive sequence of chronological periods in the history of the city's urban design, architecture, and landscape. Each period has an overall theme and associated geographical area. Since almost all of the existing historic buildings in Lawrence have associations with the periods after 1865, that study did not develop a context for the prehistoric period, exploration period, or for the post-world War II period from 1945 to As buildings and structures in Lawrence from that period age, an additional context for evaluating their historical and architectural significance will be necessary. 37 Nimz, "Living With History: A Historic Preservation Plan for Lawrence, Kansas" (Urban Studies Project for the City of Lawrence, Kansas, 1984), 59. City of Lawrence, Kansas. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-7 Historic Overview

93 the political influence of Southern slaveholders in Kansas, selected a town site located on an area of relatively level ground between the two valleys of the Kansas and Wakarusa rivers. The first party of emigrants from Massachusetts camped on Mount Oread on August 1, Given the perception in 1854 that steamboat travel was practical on the Kansas River, the Lawrence site seemed to have the potential to become the regional metropolis serving a vast territory. 38 Overland travelers to California, Achilles B. Wade and Charles Robinson, camped near the future site of Lawrence in The distinctive configuration of features at a point where the Kansas River turned northwest opposite a prominent ridge (later named Mount Oread) impressed both men and they returned to settle in Lawrence. Oriented along a linear north-south main street perpendicular to the Kansas River, the original town plan created a regular grid street pattern including reservations for parks, schools, and public buildings that remained a significant aspect of the core of the city and its community. A. D. Searle's revised plat of 1855 established Lawrence's urban design. The original area of the town site was reduced from a tract extending for 2½ miles along the river and 1½ miles from the river south to an area one-mile square. 39 In 1855, the pro-slavery territorial legislature established Douglas County. Later in 1857, Lecompton, a pro-slavery settlement west of Lawrence, became the first county seat. Residents of Lawrence then adopted their own town charter by acclamation rather than accept one from the hostile legislature. When free-state settlers gained control of the legislature, one of the first bills considered was a charter for Lawrence, which gained approval on February 11, From a settlement of approximately 400 in 1855, Lawrence grew to be a town of 1,645 residents by 1860, but it was smaller than other towns in the region. Kansas City, had a population of 4,418 and Leavenworth was the largest city in Kansas with a population of 7,400 residents. The initial settlement area between Mount Oread and the Kansas River was relatively small. Most buildings were simple and impermanent. At the end of 1854, Lawrence had "... about fifty dwelling houses, some of shakes, some grass-covered, some sod and log, some of tarred canvas, and one or two covered with oak boards." There were two boarding 38 Ibid., Holland Wheeler, City of Lawrence with its additions, map. (New York: T. Bonar, lith., ca. 1858), Kansas Collection, Spencer Research Library, University of Kansas and A. T. Andreas, History of the State of Kansas (Chicago: A. T. Andreas, 1883), David Dary, Lawrence Douglas County Kansas: An Informal History, ed. Steve Jansen (Lawrence: Allen Books, 1982), 43; Andreas, 310; and Richard Cordley, A History of Lawrence, Kansas (Lawrence: E. F. Caldwell, 1895), 159. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-8 Historic Overview

94 houses, a saw and planning mill, a butcher's shop, and two stores. 41 Reverend Richard Cordley reported that construction began of several substantial brick buildings on Massachusetts Street late in 1857 and was completed in the following year. When Cordley first arrived in autumn, however, the prospect was disappointing. The town seemed smaller than I had expected to find it, and had a more unfinished look. There were not only no sidewalks, but no streets, except in name and on the map. The roads ran here and there, across lots and between houses, as each driver took a fancy. This gave a scattered appearance to the town... There were scarcely any fences or dooryards, and gardens were almost unknown. There had been hardly a tree or bush planted on the town site. 42 One of the greatest impediments to early commercial development was the problem of transportation. Originally, town planners envisioned Lawrence as a river town like Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, and St. Louis, but steamboating on the Kansas River was a failure. The pioneer ferry across the Kansas River became a critical link in the local transportation network. Along with building and transportation, the development of agriculture was the most important economic activity during this period. Disputes over land claims in signified the area east of Massachusetts Street as a "contested site" first associated with pro-slavery squatters. Environmental problems also delayed development in East Lawrence. Early issues of the Lawrence Herald of Freedom warned against settling in the edge of the timber near the Kansas River because of resulting sickness (possibly malaria). 43 Although early settlers did not understand disease patterns, they considered the property in the low-lying area of East Lawrence less desirable. A bird's eye view of Lawrence in 1858 shows only scattered residential development, with the greatest number of buildings near the Kansas River. An area west of Massachusetts was fairly well developed, but houses east of Massachusetts were scattered. Present-day 14 th Street is the southern limit of street development. Typically, such promotional views included proposed street and properties as well as developed areas; but the Lawrence view suggests the early spatial differentiation of commercial and residential areas. 44 Quantrill's raid in 1863 was the most dramatic event of the settlement period. Although both Union and secessionist troops ranged back and forth across the border country of 41 Andreas, Richard Cordley, Pioneer Days in Kansas (New York: Pilgrim Press, 1903), Cathy Ambler, "Identity Formation in the East Lawrence Neighborhood," (unpublished paper, University of Kansas, 1991), 7, Kansas Collection, Spencer Research Library, University of Kansas, 44 Deon Wolfenbarger, "East Lawrence Historic Resources Reconnaissance Survey Report," (cultural resource report prepared for the City of Lawrence, Kansas, 1995), 6. City of Lawrence, Kansas. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-9 Historic Overview

95 western Missouri and eastern Kansas during the Civil War, the most publicized raid occurred when about 300 Confederate guerrillas under the leadership of William C. Quantrill surprised Lawrence residents early in the morning of August 21. Meeting no organized resistance, the raiders looted banks, stores, and saloons. They killed approximately 200 men and burned most of the buildings in the central part of town. The majority of business houses of Lawrence lined both sides of Massachusetts Street between 7 th and 9 th streets. Quantrill s men destroyed about seventy-five buildings in this area. As the Lawrence Daily Journal explained in 1880, "The entire business part of the town was burned and a large number of private residences. The town, as we now see it, has mainly been built since that date." 45 From the 1850s through the 1950s, the two-part commercial block was the prevalent commercial style in downtown Lawrence. This central commercial area also included churches, residences, and civic buildings representative of the popular styles of each period. 46 The destruction of Quantrill's raid in 1863 retarded residential development for only a short time. A witness to the raid recalled that "... nearly one-half of the residences were also burned [ ] almost all those in the central portion of the town. Along the banks of the river, and around the outskirts, most of the houses were left." According to a list compiled on the fiftieth anniversary of the raid in 1913, eleven houses in East Lawrence survived the raid. Three of those listed remain today, but at least three other standing buildings identified in survey appear to date to a time prior to 1863, and four other houses date to the 1860s, possibly before the raid. In West Lawrence, only five houses constructed during the settlement period remain. 47 City-building Period, Rebuilding the town after Quantrill's raid, the completion of a railroad branch, and the end of the Civil War contributed to a notable, but short-lived boom in Lawrence. An influx of settlers increased the town's population to 8,320 by Most of this increase occurred in the last five years of the decade. After 1873, the town never experienced such a surge in growth until Lawrence Daily Journal "City of Lawrence," special edition (January, 1880), 2; and Andreas, Deon Wolfenbarger, "Lawrence Downtown Historic Building Survey," (cultural resource report prepared for the City of Lawrence, Kansas 1994), City of Lawrence, Kansas. 47 Cordley, Pioneer Days, 230; Wolfenbarger, "East Lawrence Survey Report," 7; David Benjamin and Dennis Enslinger, "Resurvey of Old West Lawrence Report," (cultural resource report prepared for the City of Lawrence, Kansas 1991), 13. City of Lawrence, Kansas. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-10 Historic Overview

96 Construction of the Kansas Pacific Railroad to North Lawrence in November 1864 and the Leavenworth, Lawrence, and Galveston to East Lawrence in 1867 created jobs in construction, associated businesses, and eventually in local manufacturing for immigrants and new residents of Lawrence. Overshadowing the earlier territorial conflict between New Englanders and Missourians, the emigration of new groups of Germans, Irish, Scandinavians, and African-Americans to Lawrence created a bustling western town. Population diversity was a significant theme during this city-building period. According to the 1865 State census, only 23 percent of the people in Lawrence were from New England, 29 percent were from the North Midland (Ohio, Illinois, and Indiana), 29 percent were from the Upper South, and 18 percent were from Europe. 48 Railroad construction also created a new town north of the river. Geographic separation meant that North Lawrence developed as a distinct community with its own schools, churches, and businesses. This community organized after the Kansas Pacific Railroad began operation. S. N. Simpson laid out a town site of 320 acres in Immediately after its incorporation a year later, "... building began in earnest, and many of the buildings constructed during this period still remain standing." An attempt in 1869 to annex the new town to Lawrence failed, but on March 17, 1870 the citizens of North Lawrence and Lawrence voted to consolidate. North Lawrence comprised the 5 th and 6 th wards of the city with the boundary between the two on what is now North 6th Street. 49 Rapid growth and unfulfilled ambition were themes of this period. Mud on Massachusetts Street was a problem during the wet years of Late in 1870, a group of property owners petitioned the city council for permission to pave at least one block of the principal street. Instead of macadam (paving with crushed rock or gravel), the lot owners decided to use a patented system of wooden blocks. Since this technique failed after only two years, a solution to the paving problem required municipal intervention. From 1875 on, the city assumed responsibility for the main street and regularly repaved with macadam until they installed more permanent brick paving in The city s first streetcar line was an unsuccessful venture inspired by the rapid growth of Lawrence. In 1870, the city awarded a franchise for a horse-drawn line from the railroad depot in North Lawrence down Massachusetts Street. Although the franchise never paid expenses, the streetcar line continued to operate until James Shortridge, Peopling the Plains: Who Settled Where in Frontier Kansas (Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1995), Early History of North Lawrence, (Lawrence: North Lawrence Civic Association, 1930), 13, 16. Kansas Collection, Spencer Research Library. University of Kansas. 50 Cathy Ambler, "Mastering Mud on Main Street: Paving Technology in the Late Nineteenth Century," Pioneer America Society Transactions 17 (1994): 43, 45. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-11 Historic Overview

97 In 1869, the Lawrence Gas and Coal Company built a plant to manufacture coal gas for cooking and lighting. Because Lawrence did not develop as hoped, this plant "... proved to be larger and more expensive than the town and consumption then warranted, and for some years it was an unprofitable investment for its promoter." 51 Before 1869, the city and county transacted business at different locations in Lawrence. Quantrill's raid destroyed the county building and most county records; County Clerk George Bell was a casualty of the attack. The city purchased lots at the corner of 8 th and Vermont in 1865 that they leased to a group of businessmen who planned to build a large city market. After the investors ran out of money, the city finally completed a large brick "Market House" in This downtown building housed all the county offices and courtroom as well as the city offices, council chamber, and the police and fire departments. 52 Since most of the extant buildings in the Lawrence downtown area date to the periods after Quantrill s raid in 1863, the downtown development patterns reflect building construction after the Civil War period. A. D. Searle's revised 1855 plan laid out the basic characterdefining elements of streets and building lots to maximize the commercial potential of the downtown. At both ends, the linear commercial area had definite boundaries with the Kansas River to the north and South Park to the south. Commerce Extension of the Kansas Pacific Railroad to North Lawrence in November 1864 marked the beginning of a new stage of Lawrence s commercial history. Under construction at the time of Quantrill's raid, the railroad finally completed a permanent bridge across the Kansas River in December When the railroad reached North Lawrence, business boomed on both sides of the river. As the Kansas Daily Tribune reported on November 27, 1864, No man can stand an hour at the Lawrence bridge, and see the immense amount of merchandise constantly passing by teams, without being satisfied that a paying business will soon follow this new route, increasing day by day, until Southern Kansas will do all her business in Lawrence. 53 At this time Lawrence was second only to Leavenworth among Kansas cities in commercial importance. The rise of Kansas City to regional dominance, however, began with the construction of a key railroad bridge across the Missouri River in Kansas City, Missouri became the regional railroad and urban center with a population of more than 51 James C. Horton, "Two Pioneer Kansas Merchants," Kansas Historical Collections 10 ( ): ; E. F. Caldwell, A Souvenir History of Lawrence, Kansas, 1898 (Lawrence: E. F. Caldwell, 1899), n.p. 52 Andreas, ; and Dary, Dary, 129. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-12 Historic Overview

98 32,000 in 1870 and more than 56,000 in The period of greatest commercial construction activity on Massachusetts Street occurred during the years from 1864 to After Quantrill s raid, the city permitted only stone or brick buildings on Massachusetts Street because of the danger of fire in the close-packed commercial area. Merchants rebuilt their commercial buildings with stone or brick walls and cast-iron fronts. The settlement pattern north of the Kansas River directly reflected rapid growth during the brief city-building period. Commercial and residential districts developed with the construction of the first permanent buildings north of the river and the districts established many of the enduring families and social institutions of the community. Two small intersecting commercial districts with residential districts paralleling the railroad tracks and the Kansas River evolved. Along with the businesses, North Lawrence consisted of residential neighborhoods, churches, homes, and gardens along with the Kansas Pacific Railroad repair shops and the Delaware grist and sawmill. Sixty-two buildings remained on Massachusetts Street in 1994 that date to Lawrence s citybuilding period. 55 Many of these buildings underwent remodeling in later years and their present appearance no longer represents the architecture of the nineteenth century. On the south bank of the Kansas River, there are a number of nineteenth and twentieth century industrial and manufacturing buildings. Interest in the waterpower of the river began in the mid-nineteenth century, but waterpower was not of practical importance until later in the century. Residences Throughout the history of Lawrence, development of platted additions and subdivisions provided an underlying geographical structure for urban growth. At the end of the settlement period, developers platted four additions in 1863 Babcock's, Lane's First, Oread, and Solomon's additions. The post-war boom required additional subdivisions 14 during the city-building period: Babcock's Enlarged and Lane's Second additions (1865); Simpson's and South Lawrence (1866); Earl's Addition (1867); West Lawrence (1869); Cranson's Subdivision (1870); North Lawrence (annexed 1870); Christian's, Lane Place, Northeast Central, and Wilson's (1871); and Smith's and Taylor's (1872) Kenneth Middleton, "Manufacturing in Lawrence, " (unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Kansas, 940), 19. Kansas Collection, Spencer Research Library. University of Kansas. ; and I. E. Quastler, The Railroads of Lawrence, (Lawrence, KS: Coronado Press, 1979), Wolfenbarger, "Lawrence Downtown Historic Building Survey," 46, Stan Hernly, "Cultural Influences on Suburban Form: With Examples from Lawrence, Kansas," M. Arch. Thesis, University of Kansas, 1985), Appendix B, 214. Kansas Collection, Spencer Research Library, University of Kansas. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-13 Historic Overview

99 During this period, the school board erected the first permanent public school buildings in Lawrence: Central in 1865; Quincy in 1867, enlarged in 1871; New York School in 1869; Vermont in 1870; and Pinckney in As community landmarks, schools helped to define the identity of residential neighborhoods. The Board of Education erected two public schools in North Lawrence in They were known as the Fifth and Sixth Ward schools until the names changed to Lincoln and Woodlawn in The board replaced Lincoln School in 1916; that year this new building, along with McAllaster and Cordley schools south of the river, all featured the same plan. 57 The most important educational institution in Lawrence was the University of Kansas, which held its first classes in the fall of Identified as a symbol of community pride and distinction from the beginning, the University became a dominant economic institution after the turn of the century. Eventually, the demand for housing near the University of Kansas stimulated development near Mount Oread. Examples of landscape architecture such as the city park system and Oak Hill Cemetery expressed significant community values and enhanced the pattern of residential development in Lawrence. The original Lawrence survey plat of 1854 reserved four large tracts for parks. Only South Park at the end of the Massachusetts Street commercial area and Clinton Park in the northwest part of the original town remain. Located in the center of historic Lawrence, South Park resembles a New England village green. As the central public space in the developing town, South Park was the site of baseball games, band concerts, and public speeches. Properties adjoining the park enjoyed higher property values than nearby property of equal size, testifying to the value of South Park as an amenity. During the mid- to late-nineteenth century, the neighborhoods now known as Old West Lawrence and Pinckney formed one residential district. Similar economic, social, and architectural trends that developed after 1863 shaped the residential neighborhoods of East and North Lawrence and differentiated these districts from West and South Lawrence. During the brief period from 1865 to 1873, many new modest wood-frame houses in East and North Lawrence housed workers on the railroad and in associated manufacturing, agricultural processing, and business enterprises Caldwell; and "Lincoln School is in 33rd Year," Lawrence (KS) Journal-World, 13 November Benjamin and Enslinger, 15; and Wolfenbarger, "East Lawrence Survey," 11. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-14 Historic Overview

100 Agriculture and Manufacturing, Foundations of Stability, City-building in Lawrence ended in the nationwide financial panic of The popular sentiment expressed in a Lawrence Tribune editorial on March 14, 1873 that if more County bonds were approved, they should encourage manufacturing rather than railroads reflects the end to the boom and the beginning of a shift to the development of local manufacturing. By this time, even the most optimistic booster realized that Lawrence was losing the competition with Kansas City for railroad connections, population, and economic growth. The recession of the 1870s had its origins in the September 18 failure of the well-known New York investment firm of Jay Cooke and Company. Two days later, the New York Stock Exchange closed and credit became difficult to obtain. The impact on Lawrence was catastrophic. During the boom, the city and county issued a total of $900,000 in bonds to support railroad construction. After 1873, this debt became a crushing tax burden. In 1874, a drought and grasshopper invasion devastated the farms of Douglas County. Residents began to leave for more secure settlements to the east or possible opportunities in the West. By the time of the State census in 1875, Lawrence showed a loss of 1,052 residents, while the population of Douglas County declined by 2,087. By 1877, all five banks in Lawrence either failed or reorganized. 59 Because of the recession, the population of Lawrence in 1880 (8,510) was only slightly larger than in From 1874 to 1899, a pattern of slow population growth and building construction continued with an economy based on agricultural processing and manufacturing. Lawrence also functioned as a market town for agricultural businesses in Douglas County in a regional economy dominated by the nearby larger cities of Kansas City, Missouri and Topeka, Kansas. There was little increase in the overall population. The town's population in 1890 was 9,997. The rate of growth was even slower in the 1890s and by 1900 the population was only 10,682. In 1895, the editor of the Lawrence Daily Journal admitted that Lawrence was "... a little slow and conservative." 60 When completed in 1879, the dam on the Kansas River provided waterpower for small manufacturing concerns. Among them were the Consolidated Barb Wire factory and the Wilder Brothers Shirt Factory. The dam and these two factories are surviving structures that represent the late nineteenth century period of industrial development in Lawrence. Although the Lawrence dam was unique as a power source in Kansas, manufacturing in Lawrence was fairly typical of local industry in the state and region. As industry consolidated in the late nineteenth century, the dam helped Lawrence retain enterprises 59 Nimz, 81; and Dary, Lawrence Daily Journal 23 January 1895, cited in Quastler, 343. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-15 Historic Overview

101 that might have moved away or been abandoned. 61 Barbed wire manufacturing became the most important industry in Lawrence when the Consolidated Barb Wire Company completed a large new building in August In later years, "... more of the wire used by Kansas farmers came from the Lawrence plant than from all other sources combined, and the company sent miles of wire to Indian Territory, Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming, Utah." Despite its success, the company ownership changed in a forced sale in January 1899 to the American Steel & Wire Company. When the Lawrence plant closed on March 21 that year, more than two hundred men lost their jobs. The Topeka Capital referred to the closing as one of the greatest misfortunes that had happened in Kansas. 62 Except for the administration of limited police and fire protection, the city provided few municipal services in the nineteenth century. Inadequate water supply and sewage systems resulted in recurring sanitary problems. Gradually, an effort grew to address these problems. The Lawrence Journal on April 5, 1888 noted growing interest in "... an intelligent and complete storm water sewerage of the whole city. A. L. Selig, elected mayor in 1891, became known locally as the leader who provided Lawrence with "the best system of sewage of any city its size in the West." When individual wells and cisterns proved to be inadequate, a franchised company organized to distribute water. Although the central water supply system went into operation in 1887, the privately capitalized utility struggled to solve the problems of quality and supply. Water quality and distribution were not satisfactory until the city took over the system in Electricity was first generated in Lawrence in 1885 at the Pierson and Sons' flourmill. This mill was near the Kansas River at the north end of downtown. Planning for electric services began on July 13, 1887 when a Professor Marvin surveyed the businesses on Massachusetts Street to determine their demand for electrical power. Later in 1888, the Lawrence Gas, Fuel, and Electric Company acquired the Pierson dynamos along with another plant installed by the waterpower company. By August 31, 1888, Lawrence had fifteen electric streetlights along its main thoroughfares. Although the University had a few electric lights in 1888, engineering students installed the first lighting system in Commerce Most of the significant commercial buildings associated with this period survive in the downtown, some are in North Lawrence and a few are in several residential neighborhoods. 61 Middleton, 179, , Ibid. 63 Nimz, Lawrence (KS) Tribune, 13 July 1887, cited in Robert Taft, Across the Years on Mount Oread (Lawrence: University of Kansas, 1941), 34, 175; and Lawrence (KS) Daily Journal, 19 April HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-16 Historic Overview

102 Most of the commercial buildings on Massachusetts Street had been completed by Economic recovery from the recession began in late 1877 and continued through Information from the downtown survey indicated a period of modest prosperity during the 1880s. During this period, commercial construction occurred at the south end of Massachusetts, on New Hampshire, and on the cross streets. Commercial and institutional buildings were usually brick and/or stone. Masonry was more durable and fire-resistant. Before the advent of concrete, builders used stone in large quantities because it was locally available. Detached from the Massachusetts Street business district by just two blocks, the neighborhood commercial buildings at 14th and Massachusetts include two generations of businesses. Neighborhood businesses were particularly common in East Lawrence, but such businesses also appeared in the West Lawrence and Oread neighborhoods. This pattern of mixed commercial and residential uses preceded later, segregated patterns dictated by automobile routes and zoning. At the end of the century, more commercial specialization occurred. In North Lawrence, for example, businesses provided goods and services only to the surrounding neighborhoods and the agricultural hinterland north of the river. By that time, clothing, drug, furniture, and hardware stores as well as attorneys and physicians were concentrated south of the river. 65 Residences Platting in Lawrence depended on local economic and population growth trends. The street railway reorganized in 1884 extended south to 19 th and Massachusetts and down Tennessee to 17 th Street. There were connections to Bismarck Grove in North Lawrence and to the Santa Fe Railroad Depot in East Lawrence. 66 The dates of the seventeen additions recorded in the last decades of the nineteenth century reflect years of relative prosperity during the 1880s followed by slower growth in the 1890s. These included Bew's Addition, Doane's Addition, Sinclair's Subdivision (1881); Frazier's Addition in North Lawrence, Sinclair's Addition, Steel's Addition (1884); Walnut Park in North Lawrence (1885); Moreland Place (1886); Haskell Place, Logan Place, Raymond Place, South-view, University Place (1887); University Place Annex (1888); Rhode Island Street Extension (1891); and, Wilder's Addition (1897). 67 The construction of several large houses on multiple lots in the area of West Lawrence south of 6th Street reflects the accumulation of wealth by a few leading residents of Lawrence. These homes now form the key contributing buildings in the Old West Lawrence 65 Barbara Anderson, North Lawrence Survey Report (cultural resource report for City of Lawrence, Kansas 1996), 12. City of Lawrence, Kansas. 66 Carl Thor, "Chronology of Public Transit in Lawrence, Kansas" (unpublished paper, May 1980.), Kansas Collection, Spencer Research Library, University of Kansas. 67 Hernly, Appendix B, 214. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-17 Historic Overview

103 Historic District. New architectural styles introduced during this period and earlier styles continued to be constructed. While a few of the prominent late nineteenth century residences are of brick and stone, most residences were of wood-frame construction. Residential construction also incorporated a wide variety of materials and new services into more elaborate and sophisticated homes. Machine-produced ornamentation, window glass, terra cotta, brick, plaster, and paint were available in varied and durable forms. "Sanitary" plumbing, forced-air furnaces, and gas and electric lighting were innovations that made up a higher percentage of the cost of a home. 68 Both East and North Lawrence depended on their proximity to the riverfront manufacturing district on the south bank of the Kansas River. The surviving buildings constructed in East Lawrence during the 1880s and in the 1890s reflect a departure from the inactivity of the late 1870s. The same pattern of population stability and slow growth occurred in North Lawrence. Compared to East and North Lawrence, there was much more residential construction during this period in the Oread neighborhood between Massachusetts Street and the University campus. The Oread neighborhood developed from the edges inward with early commercial development on Massachusetts and university-related development on Louisiana Street. Reportedly, Oread had residents of "diverse racial makeup" and families of all economic and social classes ranging from laborers and dressmakers to physicians and university professors. Students at the University of Kansas rented rooms in the adjacent neighborhood, although some complained, as one did in 1884, "... it is a long, cold climb to get to the university, especially hard on young women." The university did not build its first campus dormitory until Established on the east edge of town in 1865, after the large number of deaths resulting from Quantrill's raid in 1863, Oak Hill Cemetery formed a significant cultural landscape in Lawrence. The new cemetery augmented Oread, the community s first cemetery on the west side of town. The beautifully landscaped and maintained Oak Hill Cemetery demonstrated a civic pride and cultural sophistication appropriate for the new post-war "city." And, although Lawrence did not develop as expected, the new cemetery still "... provided a sense of social order and continuity" from the city-building period to the early twentieth century Benjamin and Enslinger, 17-18; and Gwendolyn Wright, Moralism and the Model Home (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980), B. Allison Gray, "The Heart of Oread: Historic Resources of the Oread Neighborhood, Survey Report" (cultural resource survey for the Kansas State Historic Preservation Program, Kansas State Historical Society, 1987), 3, 4, 10. Kansas State Historical Society. 70 Cathy Ambler, "A Place Not Entirely of Sadness and Gloom: Oak Hill Cemetery and the Rural Cemetery Movement," Kansas History 15:4 (Winter ), 243, 253. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-18 Historic Overview

104 The curving lanes and paths took advantage of the natural rise and fall of the land. The circular drive at the top of the main hill provided a northern panorama of the Kansas River valley. Their arrangement of large lots were planned to emphasize family monuments, and they [the designers] used the natural beauty of the location, along with the trees, shrubs, and flowers that they added, to create the effect they desired. 71 As residential neighborhoods expanded, other public spaces and landscapes, such as Bismarck Grove and the Haskell Institute, developed during the late nineteenth century. Bismarck Grove was a tract in the countryside originally associated with the Kansas Pacific Railroad repair shops on the east side of North Lawrence. The grove became a popular community gathering place and hosted such formal meetings as the Odd Fellows Lodge convention in 1876, a national temperance convention in 1878, and regional fairs held by the Western National Fair Association from 1880 to Because of management problems and low farm prices, the association discontinued the fairs. Eventually, Captain W. S. Tough purchased the grounds in 1900 for use as a supply station for his horse and mule sales business in Kansas City. 72 Just beyond the southern city limits, the Haskell Institute, a national Indian Training School, opened on September 1, By January 1885, the boarding school had 280 students. The Institute erected three stone buildings in the late 1880s. Because the school founders envisioned a self-supporting institution to train Native American youth in the skills of agriculture, the property included cropland and pastures. The campus setting in a pastoral landscape survives to the present. 73 A Quiet University Town, In the early twentieth century, the town's population grew at a slow, gradual rate. There were 12,374 Lawrence residents in 1910; only 12,456 in 1920; 13,726 in 1930; and 14,390 in While Lawrence did not lose population, the town's rate of growth was much slower than the larger urban centers of Kansas City and Topeka. By the turn of the century, Lawrence had matured; its commercial and industrial interests were stabile. In 1910, a promotional issue of the Lawrence Daily Journal boasted that the town was "... the trading metropolis for a rich and populous agricultural county." 74 During 71 Ibid., Dary, ; Jimmie L. Lewis, "Bismarck Grove, Lawrence, Kansas, ," (M.A. thesis, University of Kansas 1968), 134. Kansas Collection, Spencer Research Library, University of Kansas. 73 Thelma Haverty, Buildings on the Haskell Campus: Past & Present (Lawrence: Haskell Press, 1975), Middleton, 109. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-19 Historic Overview

105 this period, there was a trend toward centralization of some types of businesses in the downtown, although small neighborhood businesses also proliferated. At the same time, the town lost many of its most important manufacturing establishments. A 1940 assessment of manufacturing in Lawrence revealed four of the surviving nineteenth century enterprises depended on agricultural products (flour and feed milling, vegetable canning, vinegar and dairy products). 75 During this period, city leaders made some long overdue improvements in the urban infrastructure. Local publisher E. F. Caldwell boasted in 1898 that, "... a complete system of water works has been put in, uniform street grades have been established, a number of streets have been macadamized, a great mileage of curbing and guttering, and stone and brick sidewalks laid." Despite Caldwell's boast, macadam or gravel paving had never been satisfactory. During the 1890s, there was simultaneous agitation for paving the streets and for building up a fund for an electric trolley transportation service. Paved streets were necessary for efficient trolley operation and brick was the preferred paving material if it could be obtained locally. After the city made a commitment in the summer of 1899 to pave Massachusetts Street, the McFarlane brick plant in Lawrence expanded to provide durable paving brick. John and Ben McFarlane, along with other prominent citizens, became directors of the Lawrence Vitrified Brick and Tile Company that operated into the 1920s. 76 The transportation system matched improvements in public facilities. Beginning first with the downtown commercial area, the system encouraged the development of outlying residential neighborhoods. After the great 1903 flood, the horsecar street railway ended its operations. Six years later, the Lawrence Light and Railway Company organized to build an electric trolley system for Lawrence. Besides the main route from the Union Pacific Railroad Depot to the southern end of Massachusetts Street and branches on Indiana and Mississippi streets to Kansas University, in 1910 a new line extended to Woodlawn Park in East Lawrence. Later, in 1916, an electric interurban railway, the Kansas City, Kaw Valley and Western, began business. This line ran from the North Lawrence depot along the north side of the Kansas River to Kansas City, Missouri. The streetcar system in Lawrence reached its maximum extent during the years from 1922 to After that, the company gradually replaced trolleys with buses. In 1935, passenger service on the Kansas City interurban ceased. 77 In 1909, Lawrence had about one hundred automobiles; the owners formed an auto club. Later, in the 1920s and 1930s, growing use of the automobile stimulated the dispersal of 75 Ibid., 194, Caldwell; and Middleton, 165, Thor, 1. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-20 Historic Overview

106 retail services along traffic corridors. 78 By the end of 1927, two paved roads connected Lawrence to Topeka, Kansas and to St. Joseph, Missouri. Along with the proliferation of automobiles during this period, the opening of a municipal airport in 1929 represented another new transportation trend. 79 In 1921, the Kansas legislature passed the first state zoning enabling act, which authorized cities with a population over 20,000 to implement zoning classifications. Although having a much smaller population, the leaders of Lawrence also wanted zoning authority and, in 1927, the revised State law allowed towns of all sizes to zone land uses. During this period, public concern about the commercial development along 9 th Street and adjacent to the University of Kansas led to the appointment of the Lawrence Planning Commission in 1925 and the institution of the first city zoning ordinance in June Community leaders responded to a general alarm "Kansas University would be completely surrounded by 'business houses' unless some sort of regulations were adopted." 80 By 1930, the first Lawrence City plan pointed out,... the city has spread from the original site to the hills on the west beyond the promontory on which the University is located on the south, and to the tributary on the east, with some population beyond the valley outside the corporate limits. It has also covered a portion of the flat land to the north of the Kaw River. 81 That same year, 15 percent of the population of Lawrence (13,708) was north of the river; 35 percent was north of 12 th Street and west of Massachusetts Street; 17 percent was north of 12 th Street and east of Massachusetts Street; 17 percent was south of 12 th Street and east of Massachusetts Street; and 16 percent was south of 12 th Street and west of Massachusetts Street. Planners recommended construction of a major thoroughfare system to provide for "... the increasing demands of present day automobile traffic..., but did not implement a system. They also noted that there was "... no direct or convenient approach to the University of Kansas from the growing district on the south side." Following the planners recommendation, a street opened later along the south route of the streetcar line. 82 This new access to the University facilitated the development of University Place and other residential additions south of the campus. Like other Kansas communities, the Great Depression profoundly affected Lawrence. 78 This phase of urban development has not been researched and documented. 79 Dary, 263, Hernly, 133; and Bartholomew and Associates, Comprehensive Plan: Lawrence, Kansas, volume 1 (St. Louis: Bartholomew and Associates, 1963), A City Plan for Lawrence, Kansas: Report of the City Planning Commission (Kansas City, MO: Hare and Hare, 1930), Ibid., 10, 18, 38. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-21 Historic Overview

107 Enrollment dropped at the University of Kansas in the early 1930s and the University cut faculty salaries. Enrollment later increased and, by 1939, the Lawrence Journal-World pointed out the importance of the University as "one of the city's major industries." Beginning in 1929, there was virtually no construction for years except for those projects financed by the State and federal governments. In the 1930s, federal programs assisted in improving the municipal water system, enlarging the public library, enhancing parks, and paving streets. Between 1933 and 1937, the Public Works Administration initiated twelve projects in Lawrence and Douglas County. 83 Commerce The first two decades of the twentieth century were years of prosperity and modest growth in Lawrence as manifested in the public buildings constructed during this period. In downtown Lawrence, the Douglas County Courthouse, the old Public Library (1904), and the old Post Office (1912) are landmarks from these years. Of the surviving downtown buildings dating from this period, almost twice as many date to the years from 1900 to 1920 as compared to the next twenty-five years. These different phases of commercial development reflect a stable local economy and gradual population growth followed by the national financial depression of the 1930s. Residences As the Lawrence Journal boasted in 1910, "Lawrence is conceded on all hands to be the most beautiful residence city in Kansas. Its homes present uniformity in good architecture, a tasteful construction and delightful surroundings." Few of these homes were for rent, "... most of them having been built up to be occupied by the owners, which means good construction, and well-kept grounds." 84 Larger residences replaced many smaller houses in the Oread neighborhood. 85 From the late nineteenth century, younger and more prosperous residents tended to move to new residential districts in West and South Lawrence. The 1922 School Survey reported,... the desirable vacant lots available for future residences are for the most part west of Illinois street and north of the University, and in the territory south of the vicinity of 15th street... It is an interesting fact that Lawrence is only about 50% occupied. Not more than one-half of all the lots in the city are occupied Nimz, 95; Dary, "Live Lawrence," Lawrence (KS) Daily Journal, November 1910, Gray, 10. Early in this period, the city assigned numbers instead of names to the east-west streets. See Lawrence City ordinance #973, "Renaming certain streets in Lawrence, Kansas," 13, December School Survey of Lawrence, Kansas (Lawrence, Kansas State Printing Plant, 1922), 56. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-22 Historic Overview

108 The most densely settled area of the city was a zone three blocks wide on either side of Massachusetts extending south to the vicinity of 19 th Street. During this period building continued in West Lawrence and Oread. In 1895, the removal of the Leavenworth, Lawrence, and Galveston railroad bridge over the Kansas River hurt economic prospects in East Lawrence. Another blow to economic vitality and residential property values was the closing of the Barb Wire manufacturing plant in March The loss of jobs in the manufacturing enterprises located on the Kansas River also contributed to the neighborhood's decline. 87 New residential construction continued in the south part of the neighborhood with few new homes constructed in the older, north part of the neighborhood. Beginning in the early twentieth century; downtown businesses as well as residential neighborhoods in West and South Lawrence benefited from the growth and increasing importance of the University of Kansas while East and North Lawrence did not benefit from the university s growth. The "great floods" of 1903 and 1951 damaged North Lawrence. When the Kansas River inundated North Lawrence in 1903, residents fled across the bridge south into Lawrence and, after the bridge washed away, most were evacuated by small boats. On June 1, "the river was ten miles wide just east of Lawrence." The flood destroyed part of the original North Lawrence town site. The river geographically and socially separated Lawrence. According to the Lawrence Social Survey published in 1917, the floods of 1903, 1904, and 1908 intensified the "social and economic chasm between the two sections of the community." 88 The development of new residential districts south of 15 th Street was a significant trend during this period. In the movement toward southern and western development, C. B. Hosford was a leader who began developing real estate in 1906 and incorporated his investment and mortgage company in Later, the Lawrence Journal World concluded that, "... one of the principal contributions to the city has been the residential development carried on by this firm. Eight additions and sub-divisions have been developed and placed on the market by them." 89 Charles E. Sutton developed Breezedale Addition at the southern end of Massachusetts Street and the streetcar line where the street intersected with 23rd. 90 On the site of the Poehler estate, Elmhurst, Sutton built five homes of noticeable architectural character between 1906 and This was the first attempt in Lawrence to create an identifiable suburban neighborhood. However, the addition, situated far from the center of Lawrence near the pastoral landscape of Haskell Institute, grew slowly over the next three decades. To the east, at the terminus of the streetcar route in far eastern 87 Quastler,, 344, F. W. Blackmar and E.W. Burgess, Lawrence Social Survey (Topeka: Kansas State Printing Plant, 1917), Lawrence (KS) Journal-World October 10-11, 1929, Lawrence: Yesterday and Today (Lawrence: Lawrence Daily Journal-World, 1913), 41. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-23 Historic Overview

109 Lawrence, developers platted the Fairfax and Belmont additions at the intersection of 13th and Prairie streets. 91 South of the University, the platting of University Place Addition in 1887 resulted from a proposed streetcar route on Louisiana, Illinois, 17 th, and 18 th streets. Development in the addition did not occur until after E. W. Sellards promoted University Place in 1914 as a neighborhood offering "... a beautiful view, fresh air, near the University an Ideal spot for a home." 92 The oldest extant residence is the Benjamin Akers residence constructed in Another landmark is "The Outlook," built by banker J. B. Watkins in The mansion is now the University Chancellor's residence. Several other homes constructed from circa 1910 to the 1930s were the homes of University professors Although Professor F. O. Marvin presented the first plan for the original University of Kansas campus in 1897, the 1904 George Kessler plan for long-range campus development was more significant. Kessler proposed organizing future building around a huge central administration building. The construction of Strong Hall created this focal point. Kessler also projected the development of "Dormitories or Other Buildings," "Club Houses," and "Homes of Faculty" on the west ridge of Mount Oread. 93 In this respect, the Kessler plan foreshadowed the eventual development of both University facilities and residential districts west of the campus. Individual professors in the School of Engineering and the Department of Architecture influenced campus planning and the design of residences west of campus. In the chronological development of residential subdivisions in Lawrence, there was a pause between the prosperous early decades and modest growth during the 1920s and 1930s. Twenty-nine additions and subdivisions recorded between 1901 and 1919 were primarily in the south part of Lawrence. Only seven new plats date to the period after 1920 the first in 1925 and the last two in These included some of the first residential developments adjacent to the University to the west and the first to break out of the western grid pattern. Given Court, platted in 1926, had the first looped and curving roads. Westhills Number 1, platted in 1931, had the earliest winding roads with lots not strictly oriented to the four cardinal directions. Colonial Court, platted in 1935, had the first true cul-de-sac in the City's residential development. 94 With an innovative curvilinear street pattern and irregular building orientation, the development of University Heights west of the campus demonstrated modern trends in suburban design and residential architectural styles. Originally subdivided in 1909, the 91 Hernly, 112, "University Place Homes Tour," (brochure, 1992) Kansas Collection, Spencer Research Library, University of Kansas. 93 Marvin's plan was discussed in the University Weekly 13 November 1897; and Taft, , Hernly, Appendix B, 215. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-24 Historic Overview

110 subdivision underwent re-platting in 1928, and its main street was renamed Crescent Road. The City of Lawrence annexed University Heights in In the period after World War I, a number of factors imposed controls on suburban development. Covenants became commonplace, particularly restrictive covenants that prevented the sale of property to ethnic and religious minorities, which came into widespread use across the nation. In Lawrence, some properties were subject to deed restrictions, which prohibited sale or occupancy by "any other than a member of the Aryan race." The 1948 decision of the United States Supreme Court in the case of Shelley v. Kramer outlawed the restrictions regarding the sale of property to a person of a minority race. 96 After the war, developers began to set standards relating to lot sizes, street frontage, house dimensions, placement of outbuildings, architectural styles, and other landscape features. At the same time, the advent of zoning ordinances further defined the newly developing areas of towns. As previously mentioned, the city established the first zoning ordinances in Lawrence in The purpose of the ordinances was to mitigate nuisances, provide protections to increase property values and to address health and safety issues. Zoning routinely established "single family residential" as the highest zoning classification. By separating commercial, industrial, and residential uses, zoning prevented multi-family, industrial, and commercial development from harming the property values of single-family neighborhoods. 97 Subdivisions platted after World War I reflected this trend; usually they were entirely residential. In Lawrence, for example, several subdivisions platted west of the University allowed only single-family residences and excluded apartments, boarding houses, fraternity buildings, and sorority houses. While such social and legal factors influenced the development patterns, advances in technology also shaped the built environment of Lawrence. August 22, 1922 marks the date of the completion of the first paved road between Lawrence and Topeka. Street improvements for automobile traffic divided West Lawrence. In 1944, the proposed plan to make 6 th Street a through route for east-west traffic on Highway 40 to reduce congestion at 7 th and Massachusetts created controversy. Although the PTA and Board of Education opposed this routing in front of Pinckney Elementary School, in 1950 the State highway commission authorized the relocation. To solve the traffic hazard, the commission agreed 95 Elaine Warren, "University Heights Part Two, 1906 to 1996," (unpublished paper, Architecture 600, 1996), 15-16, 25. Kansas Collection, Spencer Research Library, University of Kansas. 96 Charles and Molly Baer, "The History of Westwood, Lawrence, Kansas," (unpublished paper, 1995), 75. Kansas Collection, Spencer Research Library, University of Kansas; and Warren, Elizabeth Rosin and Sally Schwenk, "South Lawrence Survey Report," (cultural resource report prepared for the City of Lawrence, Kansas, 1999), 18. City of Lawrence, Kansas. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-25 Historic Overview

111 to construct a pedestrian underpass with ramps opposite the school. 98 Construction of this trafficway divided the Pinckney neighborhood from what is now known as Old West Lawrence. The paving of the intersections of highways 10, 73W, and U.S. Highway 40, just north of the city limits, affected the North Lawrence neighborhood. This improved the connection between the road leading out of Lawrence and the main road linking Kansas City and Topeka. 99 Post-World War II Lawrence The outbreak of World War II brought dramatic changes in the city's fortunes. Sunflower Ordinance Plant, which opened in nearby Johnson County in May 1942, brought three thousand new workers to the area. Most of them lived in Lawrence. After the war ended, the large number of veterans returning to finish their education at the University of Kansas launched the modern era in local history. Dramatic population growth and economic development characterized the post-world War II period in Lawrence. In the decade from 1940 to 1950, the population grew by more than 26 percent from 14,390 to 18,638 residents. The student population increased from 3,412 in 1945 to 4,713 in By 1960, the town's population reached 32, Commerce New industrial enterprises and remarkable growth at the University ignited a modern boom. To compensate for the inaction of the depression and war years, a Civic Action Committee organized in 1945 to promote the "Lawrence Victory Plan" for community improvements. The plan provided for seventeen projects including new facades on downtown business buildings, an improved airport, additional city parks, city water improvements, and an effort to attract more visitors. 101 As the Lawrence Journal-World reported on August 19, 1948, "The City of Lawrence is having its face lifted." On Massachusetts Street, some storefronts were "completely torn down and modern structures put in their place." The expected value of construction surpassed $1 million by the year's end. 102 In 1949, the city revised its original zoning ordinance. This change instituted segregated uses and rezoned portions of the older residential districts; the revisions discouraged investment in the city core. The construction of the Kansas Turnpike between Kansas City and Oklahoma further stimulated the economic development of Lawrence, particularly north of the river. The route for the high-speed toll road roughly paralleled U.S. Highway 40 on the north side of the Kansas River and linked the capital city of Topeka with the business centers of Kansas 98 Lawrence (KS) Journal World, 22 May 1944; 7 November 1944; 4 September Ibid., 14 January Nimz, 95; Hernly, 158; and Wolfenbarger, "Lawrence Downtown Historic Building Survey," Dary, Nimz, 95. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-26 Historic Overview

112 City, Missouri and Kansas City, Kansas. The completed turnpike just north of the Lawrence city limits opened to motorists on October 21, In 1951, the Lawrence Chamber of Commerce boasted a 60 percent increase in the city s population since From 1949 to 1951, the industrial payroll increased 40 percent. A Chamber brochure promoted Lawrence as a site for plant relocation because the federal government recommended that "... industry move inland from heavily industrialized coastal areas." Lawrence offered a mid-america location, construction sites on mail-line transportation, proximity to markets, and "... a ready pool of skilled craftsmen and dependable labor." 104 A Westvaco sodium phosphate plant and Cooperative Farm Chemicals nitrogen fertilizer plant opened in 1950 and 1951 east of Lawrence. In 1951, FMC Phosphorous Chemicals built a plant on the east edge of North Lawrence. Stokely Foods operated a canning plant on the east border of East Lawrence. During the Korean War, the federal government reactivated the Sunflower Ordinance plant in western Johnson County. Because of the plant, the National Defense Production Administration designated Lawrence as a critical defense area in 1952 and relaxed wartime economic controls on building materials. 105 Residences After 1945, suburban residential development in Lawrence resembled that of other communities throughout the nation. Home ownership, particularly for white middle-class families, became a public policy goal. Federal programs such as the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), which revolutionized home loan financing with the long-term, lowinterest, amortized mortgage; the G.I. Bill, which allowed home purchase without a down payment; and the introduction of personal income tax deductions for mortgage interest provided a foundation for extraordinary residential construction and suburban expansion. 106 The Housing Act of 1949 stimulated investment in large housing developments. A prominent example in Lawrence was Park Hill, a subdivision with one hundred homes located southwest of the intersection of 23 rd and Vermont streets. On October 3, 1949, City leaders proposed the annexation of West Hills, Belmont, and Fairfax Additions in order to reach the population of fifteen thousand necessary for state designation as a first class city Sherry Schirmer and Theodore Wilson, Milestones: A History of the Kansas Highway Commission and the Department of Transportation (Topeka, KS: Department of Transportation, 1986), 22-23, Chamber of Commerce, Look to Lawrence, Kansas (Lawrence: Lawrence Journal World, 1951). Kansas Collection, Spencer Research Library, University of Kansas. 105 Hernly, Ibid., 157; and Stan Hernly Architects, "West Lawrence Historic Resources Survey Report," (Cultural resource survey for the City of Lawrence, 1997), Hernly, 144, , 159; Lawrence Journal-World 3 October HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-27 Historic Overview

113 During the post-war period, residential developers platted over 145 subdivisions and additions between 1945 and 1964, and from 1953 through 1959, the city averaged fifteen additions per year. 108 Most of this new development occurred to the south, southwest, and west of the town center and included commercial centers as well as residential areas. 6th, Iowa, and 23rd streets became the main commercial arteries, serving the growing suburban developments. 109 After 1945, suburban planning dramatically changed the pattern of residential development so that developers laid out subdivision with long blocks, curved streets, T-intersections, and cul-de-sacs rather than streets arranged on a grid. In South Lawrence (south of 19th Street), Owens Addition (1951); Olmstead Subdivision (1953); Mitchell Addition (1953); Edmonds Addition (1954); Meadow Acres (1954); Southwest Addition (1954); Schaake Subdivision (1954); University Terrace (1955); and the James-Farr Addition (1956) demonstrate this trend. All of these developments contrast with the pre-war grid pattern apparent in the University Place additions north of 19 th Street. However, most of the postwar additions retained an axial orientation, dominated by long, parallel east-west streets. Each subdivision plan incorporated extensions of major streets. Arterial and secondary streets run north and south at varying intervals. The most striking difference is the variety of lot sizes found both within and between the post-war additions. 110 During the 1960s, the population of Lawrence grew from 32,858 in 1960 to 45,698 in 1970, and to 53,029 in Nearly two thousand new industrial jobs were created in the 1960s. During this period, the platting of 266 subdivisions surpassed that of the 1950s building boom. 111 By the mid-1960s, the plan of suburban residential subdivisions began to change from the form of the post-war suburb. "Planned Unit Development" became important. These medium-density developments grouped apartments, townhouses, and single-family houses together and reserved green space and other areas for common use. Super blocks, served by winding streets and cul-de-sacs emerged as the most common design pattern. 112 City leaders responded to this growth and development by engaging one of the most prominent urban planning firms of the time, Harland Bartholomew and Associates, of St. Louis, Missouri. Beginning in 1963, the firm prepared a comprehensive plan, Guide for Growth: City of Lawrence, Kansas, The plan consisted of six preliminary reports and a final report of some 130 pages. While the future projections of needs developing 108 Hernly, Rosin and Schwenk, Ibid Hernly, 174, Ibid. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-28 Historic Overview

114 from population and transportation growth were valuable, the emphasis on efficiency allowed little consideration for the significance of existing buildings and neighborhoods and historic preservation. For example, the Bartholomew plan focused on the central business district, stating "... remodeling and revitalization of its central area will surely increase the trade element of our city's economy." Characteristic of a firm whose founder had extensive experience in the process of rebuilding cities through an approach known as urban renewal, the planners argued for physical improvements. "The present downtown, properly remodeled, can easily accommodate three or four times as many customers as it does today. It does not require a greater area; instead it demands a more intensive and efficient use of a smaller but more convenient area." 113 If the changes to traffic patterns and to Massachusetts Street suggested by Bartholomew and Associates had been implemented, the historic downtown district would have been very different. Instead, the effects of zoning instituted at this time affected the adjacent residential neighborhoods. In the land use plan section, the Bartholomew plan sought "... to encourage density in population in the central part of the city near the central business district and the University (preferably between them)." The planners went on to propose that high-density residential uses be concentrated between the University campus and the central business district." Actually, the land use plan adopted in 1964 provided for multifamily residential zoning on three sides of the Kansas University campus. That area extended to 9 th Street on the north, Vermont on the east, and to 19 th Street on the south. 114 The adopted land use plan in 1964 was followed by the adoption of a new zoning code in This zoning code was used by the City to implement the 1964 Plan. In , the City of Lawrence and Douglas County adopted a City/County comprehensive plan, Horizon 2020 the Comprehensive Plan for Lawrence and Unincorporated Douglas County. The 1966 Zoning Code was replaced in 2006 with a new Land Development Code Chapter 20 of the Code of the City of Lawrence. 113 Harland Bartholomew and Associates, Guide for Growth: City of Lawrence, Kansas, Summary of the comprehensive plan adopted by the Lawrence City Planning Commission, December 8, , 3, Ibid., 3-4. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 4-29 Historic Overview

115 Preservation Goals, Policies, and Implementation Strategies HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-1 Goals

116 Chapter Five - Preservation Goals, Policies, and Implementation Strategies Mechanisms are needed to integrate historic preservation efforts in all city and county planning processes. In addition, new policies and processes need to be developed to protect the visual character of areas that include historic resources and to inaugurate particular preservation and conservation initiatives that: encourage appropriate new infill construction in older neighborhoods and commercial centers; retain and create appropriate transition areas and buffer zones between historic districts, institutions, downtown, and commercial corridors, such as alleyways, landscape features, etc.; establish notification area boundaries and design issues in environs review; and encourage property maintenance. GOAL # 1: INCORPORATE PRESERVATION AS AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF THE CITY AND COUNTY PLANNING PROCESSES POLICY 1.1: EXPAND HISTORIC PRESERVATION IDENTIFICATION, EVALUATION, AND PROTECTION PROGRAMS The basis of an integrated, community-based preservation plan is an inventory of the City and County s historic assets. Effective preservation planning takes place when there is sufficient knowledge of the number, location, and significance of both above ground and buried resources. An historic resource survey identifies what resources exist, records their condition, and evaluates their level of significance. This knowledge can be used in a variety of ways: to develop programs and policies to protect significant resources from destruction or unsympathetic alteration; to determine the location and distribution of resources to aid in planning, development and incentive programs; and to establish funding priorities for further evaluation and protection efforts. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-2 Goals

117 Implementation Strategies a. Expand the cultural resource survey process to identify important resources to be considered in all city and county planning processes. Considerable research and publication, most of which occurred since 1984, documents the City of Lawrence s architectural heritage. While these efforts identified most of the significant themes in local history, much of the research was not systematic or comprehensive limiting a balanced understanding of the city s history. There are individual properties and neighborhoods not yet identified that could have important roles in defining historic contexts of the city and the surrounding region. Specifically, the multiple property documentation form that establishes the context for historic properties in Lawrence ends at the period identified as Quiet University Town, Many properties have achieved historic significance from 1945 to 1961, the fifty year mark established by the National Park Service for historic. 1 Very little survey work has been conducted in the unincorporated areas of Douglas County. Surveys should be conducted on a township-by-township basis. Special care should be taken to work with rural property owners to ensure proper notification is secured prior to conducting a survey. b. Update the existing National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form for Lawrence to include properties that have achieved historic significance since c. Work with the State Historic Preservation Office s interactive online database, the Kansas Historic Resources Inventory (KHRI), to establish an up-to-date survey database. To facilitate analysis of survey information in the planning process, the city needs to bring the cultural resource inventory database up-to-date. KHRI contains all of the SHPO s survey records and is fully searchable and available to the public. All future surveys in Lawrence and Douglas County should require consultants to enter the survey information into the KHRI system. d. Launch an ongoing effort to create National Register and local historic districts in the city with design guidelines to maximize the potential to stabilize and increase property values while protecting resources. Properties listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places represent a small percentage of the city s significant structures, sites, buildings, streetscapes, commercial centers, and cultural landscapes. As of 2011, the Lawrence Register includes only thirty-six individual properties and the Oread historic residential district. e. In conjunction with property owners, develop and implement a National Register, and State Register nomination plan for significant historic properties within the unincorporated areas of the county. A HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-3 Goals

118 Multiple Property Documentation Form should be developed for the County identifying development periods and associated property types. Because of the potential issues with environs review, any property listed in the unincorporated areas of the county should only be listed upon completion of an environs definition that clearly defines the environs boundaries and design considerations. The property owner and adjacent property owners shall be consulted in the development of the environs definition. f. Identify and evaluate, during the development review process, properties that are fifty years 1 or older that will be affected by development proposals such as rezoning, platting, development plans, conditional use permits, and use permitted upon review permits. When properties are identified as historic, an assessment of historic integrity should be completed. If the identified property is eligible for listing in the Lawrence, Kansas or National registers, protection measures should be evaluated. g. Working with property owners, develop a program to list as many eligible properties in the National Register and State Register as possible, enabling property owners to utilize the federal and state rehabilitation tax credits. h. Reevaluate the city s demolition ordinance and investigate streamlining the 30-day waiting period by developing a policy for properties which are potentially eligible for listing. Currently, city ordinances provide protection of significant resources from demolition only for properties listed individually or as contributing to a designated historic district in the Lawrence Register. Current ordinance provisions require a thirty day arbitrary delay before demolition can occur. However, there is no process to evaluate the significance, work with the property owner, or to seek alternative solutions. As a convenience to property owners and from a preservation perspective, a demolition policy that by ordinance outlines a process for public participation and consideration of all issues affecting a proposed demolition will benefit the city. For example, some cities, due to the large amount of significant historic properties that have not been inventoried or locally designated, have amended their ordinances to provide for demolition review for all properties in the city that are over fifty years in age. In these models, city staff conducts a preliminary review to determine if the property has historical integrity and significance. If not, the demolition permit process proceeds. For properties that are significant or have the potential to be significant, the local historic preservation review commission (i.e. the Lawrence Historic Resources Commission) conducts a review. The review includes consideration of whether the property is economically viable, what will replace the demolished building/structure, and consideration of economic hardship based on a model developed by the American Planning Association. 1 The National Park Service s criteria for evaluation of historical significance exclude properties that achieved significance within the last fifty years unless they are of exceptional importance. Fifty years is the general estimate of time needed to develop the necessary historical perspective to evaluate significance. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-4 Goals

119 i. Explore alternative protection mechanisms used in other communities for protection programs for identified significant rural resources. Lawrence and Douglas County should initiate successful programs for evaluation, prioritization, and preservation of selected significant rural resources. The county and the city should work directly with property owners to determine the most appropriate protection mechanisms. POLICY 1.2: DEVELOP OR MODIFY APPROPRIATE ZONING, BUILDING CODE, AND FIRE CODE REGULATIONS TO FACILITATE THE PRESERVATION AND REHABILITATION OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES. Zoning regulations are a key preservation tool as they contribute to patterns of neighborhood change and investment as well as disinvestment. Neighborhood preservation and revitalization efforts benefit from compatible land use regulations, including the existing zoning ordinances. Implementation Strategies a. Investigate the possibility of creating additional conservation districts as an alternative protection mechanism and standard for environs review. Conservation Districts established by overlay zoning can be a successful tool to creating buffer zones for historic districts. In particular, they can encompass and define the design issues related to environs review. They can strategically address design issues for new construction in areas that have a sense of place but do not meet the criteria for Local, State or National Register designation. Conservation Districts can also be implemented to protect potentially significant resources that are not yet fifty years of age and therefore ineligible for local, State or national designation. They can also be used to protect and stabilize areas that, with the use of incentive programs, may be upgraded to meet National Register, State Register, and local historic district designation criteria. Design guidelines for Conservation Districts can be specifically tailored to promote the desired visual character and allowable special land uses of specific geographical areas. For example, in a Conservation District created to serve as a buffer to a historic district or as a transition zone between an older residential streetscape and a commercial area, limited design review of major changes such as new construction and demolition limits adverse changes to the character of the district. At the same time, it encourages property owners to make positive changes to their buildings or to erect new buildings that are compatible to the streetscape. Usually the scope of the review helps to maintain the appropriate size, scale, massing, materials, and building setbacks within the designated area. In a Conservation District for properties that might in the future be eligible for local or National Register designation, guidelines might address avoiding irreversible loss of specific character-defining architectural elements as well as retention of the appropriate zoning. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-5 Goals

120 The City of Lawrence established the Urban Conservation Overlay District to allow for the creation of conservation districts. One of the key elements in the creation of an Urban Conservation Overlay District is the development of design guidelines and the identification of contributing and non-contributing structures. b. Review and update existing city zoning to be compatible with existing or desired land use that promotes preservation of intact residential neighborhoods and commercial centers that have historical, architectural, and physical integrity. Among the issues to be considered are: 1. consistency between overlay zoning and base land use zoning among contiguous properties; 2. flexible provisions for developing compatible new infill construction on vacant lots; 3. allowance of innovative preservation alternatives, such as additional or specialty uses including bed and breakfast, studios, and other professional uses; 4. appropriate design guidelines and site development controls to encourage quality rehabilitation and compatible new construction worthy of preservation in the future; and 5. effective procedures to discourage demolition of significant buildings and structures. c. Require new development in established areas of the city to use designs complementary to the adjacent streetscape. d. Create transition zones and flexible links within Lawrence by using setbacks, alleys, parks, and open space in a way that is consistent with established patterns. e. Adopt a rehabilitation code to address building code and fire code requirements in historic structures for the City of Lawrence and Douglas County. POLICY 1.3: DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT FORMALIZED PROCEDURES TO COORDINATE PRESERVATION EFFORTS AMONG CITY AND COUNTY DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES Economic development, land use and property management issues are the purview of a number of different county and city departments and quasi-public agencies to which government bodies have delegated certain programmatic responsibilities. To integrate preservation methodologies in a manner that assures they become part of the day-today program administration, it is necessary to develop formalized policies and procedures. The result should guarantee that the public receives information on related preservation policies, procedures, and ordinances when undergoing compliance with any department or public agency s processes. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-6 Goals

121 Implementation Strategies a. Establish formalized procedures for the Lawrence Historic Resources Commission (HRC) or the Historic Resources Administrator to review and comment on City planning activities. b. Facilitate the integration of the development review process and the building permitting process with the design review process. Consider alternative processes for project review. c. Require historic preservation elements as part of comprehensive, watershed or sub-basin, sector, neighborhood, and special area plans. d. Implement consistent and systematic building and maintenance code enforcement. e. Enforce environmental code. f. Explore a demolition by neglect ordinance. g. Adopt a rehabilitation building and fire code for the city and the county. h. When possible, historic preservation issues should be represented in appointed positions. Representatives of these entities should also be considered as appointed members on the HRC. i. Working with property owners, target significant cultural landscapes for park/green space designation on the National, State or Local Register. j. Working with property owners, target open space designation to areas with probability for the presence of a high level of archaeological artifacts. Given the limited amount of resources for archaeological investigations, consideration should be given to those sites which have been documented by creditable historical research. k. Include a preservation element in the City of Lawrence s Parks and Recreation Master Plan. l. Require review of new ordinances for their impact on historic resources and historic preservation efforts. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-7 Goals

122 POLICY 1.4: IMPROVE EXISTING LOCAL AND STATE LAW DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS Successful and proactive design review must be user friendly. Review standards and processes must be clear, concise, and consistently administered. Implementation Strategies a. Conduct ongoing inspection of work after HRC review. b. Develop review process that promotes more consistent and objective interpretation of environs law. c. Provide legal enforcement of HRC decisions. d. Reconcile the differences between state law environs review and City of Lawrence s environs review standards. 2 e. Establish a recording process with the Register of Deeds to record National Register, State Register, and Local Register properties. f. Investigate ways to simplify the design review and the state law review process through the integration of building permit applications, design review applications, and development review applications. POLICY 1.5: ESTABLISH CLEAR, WORKING DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW PROCESSES WITH FEDERAL, STATE, COUNTY, PUBLIC, AND PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS LOCATED NEAR HISTORIC RESOURCES. In addition to the local city design review process for designated properties, there are a number of federal and State programs that require review to determine the impact of proposed work on significant cultural resources. Conflict over private and public institutional development needs and surrounding commercial and/or residential neighborhood needs, is most successfully addressed by establishment of processes that include a defined public participation component that establishes when, where, and what type of city or county jurisdiction is applicable. The city or county can play an important role in initiating establishment of such processes, particularly in the context of development of neighborhood, sector, or special area plans. 2 There are a number of differences between the State law requirements and the local ordinance requirements. One of the main issues is that the standard of review required under the local ordinance places the burden of proof on the Historic Resources Commission in reviewing environs review cases while the state law places the burden of proof on the applicant. In cases that involve both local ordinance and state law review there is an inherent conflict. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-8 Goals

123 Implementation Strategies a. Develop and continue agreements regarding development policies for federal, state, public and private institutions such as the University of Kansas, Baker University, Haskell University, Lawrence Memorial Hospital, Lawrence School District, Townships, and Rural Water Districts, which are located near historic areas. Such agreements should include community expectations, a public participation process, and development requirements, including development of expansion boundaries. b. Formulate Neighborhood, sector, and special area plans that establish clear boundaries for commercial areas as well as institutions. c. Form stronger partnerships between the Campus Historic Preservation Board and the Lawrence Historic Preservation Commission. POLICY 1.6: DEVELOP A PUBLIC RESOURCES POLICY THAT VALUES HISTORIC PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. Participants in neighborhood planning processes and in the Preservation Plan workshops as well as cultural resource surveys identified streetscape infrastructure elements such as alleys, curbs, sidewalks, brick streets, bridges, etc. as important elements that define historic neighborhoods. Residents in historic neighborhoods note that choice of arterial and collector streets have a profound impact on residential neighborhoods. In rural areas, the selection of major new routes encourages development. Thus, the city and county should consider historic resources and their defining elements when implementing infrastructure projects. Implementation Strategies a. Create a comprehensive approach to infrastructure improvements on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis. b. Protect and maintain existing brick streets, brick sidewalks, and hitching posts in the City of Lawrence. c. Restore brick streets and sidewalks in the City of Lawrence. d. Implement appropriate traffic calming measures in residential neighborhoods in the City of Lawrence. Traffic calming measures should be compatible with the character of the residential neighborhood. e. Investigate and implement initiatives to improve parking in Downtown with minimal impact of older buildings. f. Improve bicycle and pedestrian routes and rural trails. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-9 Goals

124 g. Target Parks and Recreation tax revenues when appropriate for cultural resource projects on public lands. h. Improve flood control to protect historic properties. i. Develop a formal review process for all public improvements to determine the effects on historic preservation and/or historic preservation planning efforts. Historic resources in the unincorporated areas of Douglas County are integral in defining the character of the county and the region. The ongoing preservation of significant resources and cultural landscapes can yield an improved quality of life and a sense of place for future generations. Specific preservation programs and processes are needed to assist in providing considerations of these resources in land use decisions to protect significant resources and to allow a balance between commercial, residential, institutional, agricultural, industrial, and natural land uses. GOAL # 2: POLICY 2.1: IDENTIFY AND CONSERVE THE HISTORIC AREAS AND PLACES IN UNINCORPORATED DOUGLAS COUNTY DEVELOP A PRESERVATION PROGRAM FOR THE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF CULTURAL RESOURCES IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF DOUGLAS COUNTY The basis of an integrated preservation plan is an inventory and analysis of the county s historic assets. Effective preservation planning takes place only when there is sufficient knowledge of the number, location, and significance of both above ground and buried resources. A historic resource survey identifies what resources exist, collects information about each resource, analyzes its continuity and change, assesses its integrity, determines its significance, and places it within the historic context of similar resources. This knowledge can be used in a variety of ways: to develop programs and policies to protect significant resources from destruction or unsympathetic alteration; to determine the location and distribution of resources to aid in planning, development, and incentive programs; and to establish funding priorities for further evaluation and protection efforts. Implementation Strategies. a. Develop and implement a rural survey plan to identify and evaluate rural resources based on a systematic approach by township areas, giving priority to areas with the highest rate of development. In 1997, HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-10 Goals

125 preservation consultants noted that the rapid pace of development outward from the municipalities threatened rural and early suburban properties that may have potential significance. Available information suggests that rural residences, barns, and other agricultural outbuildings are increasingly rare significant property types, as well as rural churches, schools, and commercial buildings. To date, only limited survey of the historic architectural and cultural resources has occurred in rural Douglas County and includes: 1. A reconnaissance survey of Palmyra Township (1989) identified a number of properties in the community of Vinland and 207 properties with associated structures, and six rural cemeteries in rural Palmyra Township that appeared to be more than fifty years old The farmstead is the most common rural property type in this township. However, examples with a complete intact set of early outbuildings are uncommon. 2. Commons on the Prairie," (1990), an unpublished master's thesis by Dennis Domer, discussed the historic architecture and cultural landscape of Willow Springs Township; and 3. Map of Historic Douglas County, Kansas," published by Adam Waits and the Douglas County Historical Society (1985) identifies individual buildings and sites of historic significance. b. Working with rural property owners, develop a cultural landscape component for the identification and evaluation of cultural resources. Rural Douglas County is a landscape that evolved through human activities, which, in turn, shaped its appearance. Like historic buildings and districts, cultural landscapes "reveal aspects of our country's origins and development through their form and features and the ways they were used. 3 Therefore, a significant cultural landscape is a geographical area, "... including both cultural and natural resources, and the wildlife or domestic animals therein, associated with a historic event, activity, or person or exhibiting other cultural or aesthetic values." There are four recognized types of cultural landscapes: historic sites that include man-made and natural features, historic designed landscapes, historic vernacular landscapes that include man-made and natural features and ethnographic landscapes that reflect specific cultural and racial groups. 4 Vinland, for example, is a rural village situated in the Coal Creek Valley, Palmyra Township, It has a cultural landscape that includes buildings, structures, cultivated and uncultivated fields, and natural features. Farther west in Marion Township, the churches and farms of the Church of the Brethren community on Washington Creek represent a potentially significant cultural landscape. The Brethren community moved to Hickory Point, Douglas County, in They established two churches, Pleasant Grove in Willow Springs Township and Washington Creek Church to the west in Marion Township. 3 Charles A. Birnbaum, Protecting Cultural Landscapes: Planning, Treatment and Management of Historic Landscapes Preservation Brief 36. (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, September 1994), Ibid. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-11 Goals

126 c. Develop an archaeological survey plan for the County that: 1. includes an archaeological predictive model for Douglas County that identifies areas of high medium and low probability and 2. prioritizes archaeological survey to focus on areas in which development is ongoing and in which resources would most likely be expected. The extent of potentially significant archaeological sites in Douglas County is not fully known. However, research and investigations indicate the potential for the presence of important sites throughout the county. In Douglas County, archaeological survey usually occurred only when triggered by federal law. As a result, little historical archaeological investigation has been conducted in the county. In addition to the more obvious benefits of preserving information about past cultures, knowledge about the location of archaeological sites is crucial to facilitating both public and private development projects. Knowledge of the location or even the ability to predict the possible occurrence of archaeological sites provides developers and government agencies with the ability to investigate during project planning and avoid expensive last minute delays in project development. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires any public or private entity utilizing federal funds, loans, or permits to identify, evaluate, and mitigate damage to archaeological resources affected by the project. This affects agencies such as the General Services Administration, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Kansas Highway and Transportation Department, and County programs receiving federal funding. One of the key issues to creating a successful archeological survey plan for the County is working with rural property owners. Only by creating partnerships with existing land owners can sites be identified and evaluated. Successful examples such as the Blanton s Crossing project should be used as models. No survey or evaluation should take place on private property without the consent of the property owner. d. Work with the State Historic Preservation Office s interactive online database, the Kansas Historic Resources Inventory (KHRI), to establish an up-to-date survey database. To facilitate analysis of survey information in the planning process, the county needs to bring the cultural resource inventory database up-to-date. KHRI contains all of the SHPO s survey records and is fully searchable and available to the public. All future surveys in Douglas County should require consultants to enter the survey information into the KHRI system. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-12 Goals

127 POLICY 2.2: DEVELOP A PRESERVATION PROGRAM FOR THE PROTECTION OF CULTURAL RESOURCES IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF DOUGLAS COUNTY TO BE INTEGRATED INTO COUNTY PLANNING POLICIES AND PROCESSES. Only after the identification, evaluation, and subsequent mapping of significant cultural resources through survey, can the county begin to target and prioritize preservation of significant resources. Rural preservation presents different challenges to integrating preservation strategies into the land use and development decision- making policies and processes. To be effective, preservation issues need to be considered early in the planning stages and in the context of other development and land use issues. Because of the many changes in agribusiness occurring as a result of international, national and local economic forces, farming and livestock enterprises that reflect nineteenth and twentieth century practices are vanishing. Preserving the physical reminders of these eras will require the cooperative, proactive efforts of property owners, private preservation and conservation organizations, and county planners. To assure a successful rural preservation program, the county should only initiate a detailed rural preservation plan, after the successful identification of significant resources. A detailed rural preservation plan must create a number of strategies or tools to be used in combination with other county, state, and federal programs to target the preservation of specific resources that have been identified as significant. Implementation Strategies a. Develop and establish by ordinance a rural preservation program for the unincorporated areas of the county. Given all issues in developing such a program, the development will take the cooperation of property owners, county administrators, and preservationists. Public meetings must be held in all parts of the county and adequate time should be allowed for all parties to voice their opinions. b. Explore the benefits and liabilities of establishing Douglas County as a separate Local Certified Government (CLG). Establishing Douglas County as a separate CLG will allow the local community to conduct state law reviews at the local level. This will ensure that reviews are conducted in a timely manner and allow for greater community control. The CLG program will also allow the county to apply for the 10% pass through Historic Preservation Fund grants. c. Investigate successful protection strategies used in other areas of the nation and develop a plan to implement those that are applicable to Douglas County, such as conservation easements and incentives to encourage private stewardship. Because of growth, Lawrence and Douglas County should initiate successful programs for evaluation, prioritization, and preservation of selected significant rural resources. d. Develop and implement a National Register and State Register nomination plan for significant historic properties within the unincorporated area of the County. Only twelve properties in the unincorporated area that are listed in the National Register and one on the Kansas Register. The lack of listed properties can be contributed partly to the HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-13 Goals

128 e. Target and prioritize sites such as the natural areas unplowed prairie and woodlands identified in Horizon for preservation. f. Target significant cultural landscapes for park/green space designation. g. Target open space to areas with a predictive model for the presence of a high level of archaeological artifacts. h. Investigate the use of funding mechanisms to retain open space around historic sites. POLICY 2.3: ELIMINATE DISINCENTIVES TO ORDERLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Zoning is a key strategy for protecting cultural resources. Current zoning and land use policies act as a disincentive for orderly planned development that incorporates preservation planning strategies. Implementation Strategies a. Require annex plans and urban growth boundaries from all municipalities within Douglas County. This will help to eliminate some of the development pressures for undeveloped land and maintain the rural character of unincorporated areas. b. Develop policies that encourage development in the urban growth boundaries of associated municipalities. POLICY 2.4: CONSERVE THE VISUAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN CITY AND RURAL AREAS As a matter of policy and practicality, the preservation of cultural landscapes requires an approach that first distinguishes and promotes distinction between developed land and farmland/natural terrain. The city and county currently have defined projected growth areas that allow orderly perimeter development outward from the City of Lawrence and other communities. Such a plan for orderly growth allows preservation of scattered significant historic resources and cultural landscapes to occur as part of planned orderly growth. In areas with significant resources or landscapes, it is important that the distinction between rural and city be maintained in the future. 5 Horizon HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-14 Goals

129 Implementation Strategies a. Create transition zones between rural areas and the city using wetlands, open spaces, parks, golf courses, "rails to trails," small farm transition areas, and commercial/rural transition areas, i.e., businesses that require open space. Maintaining the distinction between urban and rural areas through the establishment of greenhouses and other agricultural related uses maintains the distinction while allowing for orderly growth. b. Continue to investigate and create limits on development outside the urban growth areas or boundaries. c. Promote retention of agricultural land use through programs such as the transfer of development rights and conservation easements. The city and county need to capitalize on the use of incentive programs to facilitate retention of past investment in infrastructure and built environment and to reap the benefits of historic preservation. The city has not actively implemented or funded economic incentives for preservation. Public incentives should reward and utilize preservation as a tool for economic revitalization. Priority should be given to areas with significant historic resources, capitalizing on existing assets and previous public investment. GOAL # 3: INCORPORATE PRESERVATION INCENTIVES INTO THE CITY AND COUNTY S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POLICIES AND PROGRAMS To fully utilize and promote the economic advantages of historic preservation, Lawrence and Douglas County must develop programs that assist property owners in the use of preservation incentive programs. In addition, the city and county need to reprioritize how they use existing incentive programs. These programs encourage a range of activities targeted to create certain types of results. Some, such as publicly supported transportation and parking incentives, seek to spur development on a broad level; others, such as tax abatement or tax credits, both by legal constraints and/or habit, address specific types of projects and activities. All must be seen as tools to be used in various combinations to encourage revitalization in older commercial and residential neighborhoods or in selected rural areas. POLICY 3.1: ENCOURAGE THE UTILIZATION AND LINKAGE OF EXISTING INCENTIVES In addition to the federal and state rehabilitation tax credits, many available incentive programs have blight or related conditions as criteria for participation. Others focus on development of businesses. None specifically address the reuse of older buildings; they are usually targeted to new construction and attracting new residents and businesses. The following public incentive programs, are among available programs that, when targeted individually or in combinations, have a demonstrated track record in stimulating stabilization and revitalization of blighted or declining neighborhoods. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-15 Goals

130 Property Tax Exemptions Heritage Trust Fund (State Grant Program) Kansas Neighborhood Revitalization Act Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program Kansas Main Street Program Federal Charitable Deduction Easements KSA Revenue Bonds Kansas Technology Enterprise Programs Implementation Strategies a. Develop a program to list as many eligible properties in the National and State Registers as possible, enabling property owners to utilize the federal and state rehabilitation tax credits. Properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places are eligible for significant tax credits. The 20 percent federal rehabilitation tax credit applies to owners and some renters of incomeproducing National Register properties. The law also permits depreciation of such improvements over 27½ years for a rental residential property and over 31½ years for a nonresidential property. The rehabilitated building must be subject to depreciation. All of the state s National Register properties (commercial and residential) are eligible for a 25 percent rehabilitation tax credit. The federal and state tax credits can be used together. The state tax credits can be sold, and while federal tax credits cannot be sold directly, a project can involve an equity partner, such as a bank, who participates in the project by contributing funds toward the rehabilitation in exchange for some or all of the tax credits. Certain types of buildings that contribute to the significance of a historic district may also be eligible for rehabilitation tax credits. Within a district contributing buildings that are income-producing properties are eligible for both credits; nonincome-producing residential properties are eligible for the state rehabilitation tax credit. b. Maximize the use of incentives by combining them into preservation tool kits different combinations of incentives targeted for specific areas and tailored to certain needs to provide flexible and lasting strategies to address stabilization and revitalization of older residential and commercial centers. c. Target public incentives to projects in areas with existing public infrastructure and significant historic resources. d. Notify owners of eligible properties and assist them in providing access to applicable rehabilitation incentives and grants. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-16 Goals

131 e. Investigate the use of Community Development Block Grant funds to foster historic preservation efforts. f. Establish and fund the Historic Preservation Fund as described in city s Conservation of Historic Resources Code. POLICY 3.2: DEVELOP INCENTIVES TO ENCOURAGE THE REHABILITATION AND OCCUPANCY OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES In addition to existing preservation incentives, many communities develop specific incentive programs to encourage rehabilitation and occupancy of historic properties in specific locations, both rural and urban. For example, many communities encourage façade improvements using preservation guidelines through funding grants and/or technical assistance. Implementation Strategies a. Attach appropriate design guidelines to incentive programs. b. Create taxing incentives by using such tools as the Neighborhood Revitalization Act. c. Create incentives to increase critical mass development in Downtown. d. Create and target incentives to historic commercial areas such as façade improvement grants and economic incentives to owners or businesses that occupy or lease space in historic buildings. e. Develop and implement policies and programs that eliminate parking issues as a disincentive to rehabilitation of buildings, including review of use permits and accompanying parking requirements and implementation of public/private shared use of parking structures. f. Create incentives to maintain and preserve historically significant farming areas. g. Provide design and/or technical assistance to property owners undertaking preservation projects, such as schematic architectural design assistance for renovation/restoration of residences, businesses, and rural structures. h. Develop incentives to retain and strengthen small neighborhood commercial areas. i. Utilize or create incentive programs for abatement of environmental hazards in significant historic buildings. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-17 Goals

132 j. Provide incentives to reduce the number of multi-family units in houses originally designed as single-family residences that are located in historic and conservation districts. POLICY 3.3: ELIMINATE DISINCENTIVES TO PRESERVATION EFFORTS While incentives play an important role in promoting preservation, it is important to review current city and county policies that may discourage preservation. Removal of these obstacles may be as effective as implementation of incentives. Implementation Strategies a. Tax properties that are listed in the National Register, State Register or Local Register at a lower rate. b. Abolish or develop a lower fee schedule for rehabilitation building permits. The city and county need to develop a significant historic destination that establishes Lawrence and Douglas County as a gateway entity to the interpretation of regional history, linking historic preservation to a significant economic growth industry. GOAL # 4: INCORPORATE HERITAGE TOURISM AS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM POLICY 4.1: DEVELOP A COMPREHENSIVE HERITAGE TOURISM PROGRAM THAT INTEGRATES HISTORIC RESOURCES AND VENDORS INTO PROGRAM PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION Tourism is big business and Heritage Tourism is a significant component of the tourism industry. Lawrence and Douglas County have a rich legacy of historic landmarks, sites, cultural landscapes, neighborhoods, buildings, structures, and archaeological resources that can bring knowledge and understanding of past cultures and events. These are assets that can be capitalized upon. These assets have associations with national, state, and local events. They are tangible ties to prehistoric and historic native peoples, the era of European exploration, the Santa Fe, California and Oregon trails, the Border and Civil Wars, the development of regional agricultural industries, and the founding and development of a major state educational institution and multi-national Native American educational institution. To capitalize on this legacy, Lawrence and Douglas County need to develop and implement strategies to provide for the quality interpretation of the past, to preserve and protect historic and cultural resources, and to encourage collaboration and linkages within the city and county and throughout the region in developing a unified approach to capitalize on the Heritage Tourism market. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-18 Goals

133 Implementation Strategies a. Support the Freedom s Frontier National Heritage Area A National Heritage Area is an area or corridor designated by the United States Congress... where natural, cultural, historic and recreational resources combine to form a cohesive, nationally distinctive landscape arising from patterns of human activity shaped by geography. These patterns make National Heritage Areas representative of the national experience through the physical features that remain and the traditions that have evolved in them. National Heritage Areas are local partnerships with the National Park Service that: 1. protect historic, environmental, scenic, and cultural resources; 2. increase sustainable tourism and economic development; 3. educate residents and visitors about community history, traditions, and the environment; 4. create new outdoor recreation opportunities, and 5. build partnerships among federal, State, and local governments. b. Encourage and enter into cooperative regional efforts in programming and networking in public relations and marking efforts. c. Support efforts to ensure the Watkins Community Museum is an important visible partner in heritage tourism and community education efforts. d. Through the National Trust for Historic Preservation Heritage Tourism Program, the city/county should enlist the participation of all communities in Douglas County, sites, and museums to conduct a comprehensive management and interpretive assessment and to develop cooperative interpretive, marketing and programming plans. 1. Inventory of current and potential attractions. 2. Assess current attractions, visitor services, organizational capabilities, preservation resources, and marketing programs. 3. Establish priorities and measurable goals through organizing human and financial resources. 4. Prepare for visitors through development of long-term management goals that protect historic resources. 5. Market for success through development of a multi-year, multiple-tier targeted marketing plan involving local, regional, State, and national partners. 6. Develop cooperative efforts between the Lawrence/Douglas County Chamber of Commerce and local preservation groups. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-19 Goals

134 POLICY 4.2: ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT OF BLACK JACK BATTLEFIELD AS A SIGNIFICANT SITE IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES. As part of the public participation in the adoption of this plan, the Lawrence-Douglas County Planning Commission identified Black Jack Battlefield as a resource worthy of specific identification, evaluation, documentation and preservation. The majority of the battle site is listed in the National Register of Historic Places and the structure known as the Pearson House is listed in the Register of Historic Kansas Places. The national importance of this site should be recognized and celebrated. Implementation Strategies a. Support the efforts of the Black Jack Battlefield & Nature Park to document the history of this site. b. Support the efforts of the Black Jack Battlefield & Nature Park to encourage the development of this site as part of the Freedom s Frontier National Heritage Area. c. Encourage and enter into cooperative regional efforts in programming and networking in public relations and marking efforts that promote this significant historic site. Public awareness of historic resources is needed to develop public/private partnerships in promoting and implementing historic preservation. GOAL # 5: POLICY 5.1: ESTABLISH OUTREACH AND EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS DEVELOP A GOVERNMENT SPONSORED PUBLIC INFORMATION OUTREACH PROGRAM The city and county have a number of vehicles that could be used to disseminate information about historic preservation to the larger community. Among the most effective of these tools are the use of the city/county website to provide information about city/county efforts and links to other governmental and private entities in the federal, state, and local preservation network. Another important governmental tool is the publication and/or distribution of information brochures. Implementation Strategies a. Make public aware of available funding sources. b. Develop or provide hands-on materials that provide information on how to repair and preserve historic buildings according to the Secretary of the Interior s Guidelines for the Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-20 Goals

135 c. Provide information on historic neighborhoods (i.e. promote walking tours). d. Provide notification each spring, prior to the construction season, to property owners in local districts, National Register properties, and State Register properties of the design guidelines and procedures to obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness and/or State Law Review. e. Develop in-house materials for other city/county department staff about preservation processes and issues in order to assist in building consensus in applying preservation procedures. f. Provide on-going preservation education sessions for members of appointed bodies including the Historic Resources Commission, City Commission, and Planning Commission. g. Expand the city s webpage to include additional information regarding National Register listing, survey information, how-to materials, etc. h. Work with existing hardware and home improvement stores to provide hands on materials regarding historic preservation issues. POLICY 5.2: IN PARTNERSHIP WITH AN APPROPRIATE LOCAL ORGANIZATION, ASSIST IN DEVELOPING AND CONDUCTING A SERIES OF PUBLIC WORKSHOPS TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC ABOUT PRESERVATION The city and the county can play a crucial role in convening and initial coordination of educational efforts. Although both governmental entities should develop in-house and public programs that communicate information about city and county preservation programs, the larger role of education and advocacy must be undertaken by private organizations. Implementation Strategies: a. Establish forums for realtors, rural lenders, developers, contractors, preservationists, business community leaders, and neighborhood groups to acquaint them with preservation benefits, issues and procedures. POLICY 5.3: DEVELOP MEDIA RELATIONS TO BE AN ADVOCATE FOR PRESERVATION A crucial component of public education is the support of the media in coverage of events and issues. This involves both the city and county as well as private organizations. The city can play a role in assembling information and preparing press releases about its programs and related activities. However, a private organization should be designated to coordinate media relations and to respond to preservation issues related to advocacy of a particular course of action that the city/county cannot address. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-21 Goals

136 Implementation Strategy a. Promote preservation news in local press through press releases during National Preservation Week that focus on the economic impact of preservation, as well as local newsworthy events, and recent local, state or national designations, etc. POLICY 5.4: DEVELOP PROACTIVE RECOGNITION PROGRAMS Existing and new programs that recognize preservation efforts (particularly when timed to coincide with National Preservation Week) can have a positive and on-going impact on public awareness. Such programs should be part of larger media and promotions strategy promoting and understanding and support for historic preservation. Implementation Strategy a. Develop a county-wide Heritage Farm honorific program. b. Develop historic signage. c. Encourage the nomination of projects for local, state and national awards programs. POLICY 5.5: COORDINATE PRESERVATION PROGRAMS IN THE COUNTY AND CITY WITH OTHER LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS AND ORGANIZATIONS Coordinating preservation activities and programs with other local municipalities, state, and federal government organizations is a very difficult task. Preservation efforts will be more successful by facilitating cooperation between the various entities. Both the city and the county can play an important convening and facilitating role in coordinating private and public preservation efforts. Implementation Strategy a. Establish a countywide coordinating entity that includes private and public organizations and agencies. Primary goals should be: 1. development of an outreach program to unincorporated areas of the county to involve property owners in historic preservation initiatives; and 2. joining rural and city constituencies in cooperative efforts. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-22 Goals

137 Historic preservation is an important component in environmental stewardship and sustainable development. Sustainable development includes environmental sustainability, economic sustainability and cultural sustainability. GOAL # 6: INCORPORATE SUSTAINABLE PRESERVATION INTO THE CITY AND COUNTY S SUSTAINABILITY POLICIES AND PROGRAMS The citizens of Lawrence and Douglas County increasingly support environmental conservation efforts. This growing awareness of how local conditions fit into larger environmental issues has led to the recognition of the importance of natural resources and of the embodied energy contained in the built environment. Historic preservation practices are tools for better stewardship of older buildings, neighborhoods, and rural landscapes. The conservation and improvement of our existing built resources, including the re-use and improvement of historic structures, is central to our community s overall plan for environmental stewardship and sustainable development. POLICY 6.1: ENCOURAGE AND INCORPORATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN SUSTAINABLE PLANNING AND BUILDING PRACTICES To maximize the inherent sustainable qualities of historic preservation, long range planning and building practices should encourage the reuse of the existing built environment. Implementation Strategies: a. Foster a culture of reuse of existing structures by maximizing the life cycle of existing buildings. b. Encourage reinvestment in the existing built environment. 1. Explore and adopt building codes that give a discount on the overall permit fee for the reuse of historic structures. 2. Identify and promote programs that identify historic building materials, like first growth wood and historic lath and plaster, and the values they bring to structures. c. Explore the use of outcome-based codes. Building energy codes that focus on energy saving and consumption give existing structures proper credit for embodied energy and discourage teardowns. d. Explore the adoption of building codes that create sustainable communities. Building codes can address issues associated with 1. Optimizing site potential 2. Minimizing energy consumption 3. Protecting and preserving water 4. Use of environmentally sound products 5. Enhancing indoor environmental quality 6. Optimizing operational and maintenance practices HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-23 Goals

138 e. Explore the adoption of demolition codes that require sustainable practices like 1. A percentage of demolition debris to be recycled and reused 2. Demolition permit fees that reflect the values of historic resources. POLICY 6.2: DEVELOP PROGRAMS THAT ENCOURAGE PRESERVATION AS PART OF CREATING A SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY. The City and County have taken the lead in beginning to identify goals and programs that will help create a sustainable community. New goals and programs are needed to incorporate the maintenance, reuse/repurpose, and recycling of our significant historic resources. Implementation Strategy a. Develop and adopt sustainability design guidelines for historic districts. b. Develop and implement programs for City and County buildings that maintain historic fabric and reduce natural resource consumption. c. Encourage and support the development of energy strategies. Energy strategies for energy conservation and generation should include 1. Energy audits 2. Evaluations of existing systems 3. Establishing goals for energy savings. d. Encourage and support the development of sustainable energy systems that can provide energy for multiple historic properties that cannot achieve sustainable energy goals individually. Many historic structures do not have the land or roof capacity to install sustainable energy systems such as solar, geothermal, and wind for the individual structure. Energy districts can combine areas to create sustainable systems for multiple historic properties that do not have the requirements necessary to achieve this goal individually. e. Utilize increased permit fees for the demolition of historic structures to fund a preservation fund to create low interest loans or grants that facilitate the rehabilitation of historic structures. POLICY 6.3: DEVELOP AN EDUCATION PROGRAM TO INCORPORATE SUSTAINABLE PRESERVATION INTO PUBLIC INFORMATION OUTREACH PROGRAMS ON SUSTAINABILITY Historic preservation is an important component of any effort to promote sustainable development. The conservation and improvement of our existing built resources, including re-use of historic and older buildings, greening the existing building stock, and reinvestment in older and historic communities, is crucial to lowering our carbon footprint and reducing energy leakage. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-24 Goals

139 Implementation Strategies a. Develop City and County Sponsored Public Information Outreach Programs that promote sustainability through preservation and rehabilitation of historic structures. 1. Establish forums for realtors, developers, contractors, and preservationists to inform them about sustainable preservation benefits, issues and procedures. b. Align Historic Preservation Policies with sustainability policies. 1. Assist the Sustainability Advisory Board with the development of goals and priorities for future cultural resource conservation efforts. 2. Work with the Sustainability Coordinator to identify practical methods and programs to reach the City s goals for sustainability. 3. Identify and encourage the adoption of Preservation goals, policies, and programs that incorporate sustainable community ideals. c. Work with the Sustainability Coordinator to identify education programs and opportunities to promote preservation and sustainability. d. Promote educational programs that identify sustainable development and how it differs from sustainable design. 1. Sustainable Development is not limited to environmental sustainability. 2. Sustainable Development is also economic sustainability and cultural sustainability. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 5-25 Goals

140 Action Plan and Time Line HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-1 Action Plan

141 Chapter Six: Action Plan and Time Line Partners Timeframe GOAL # 1: INCORPORATE PRESERVATION AS AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF CITY AND COUNTY PLANNING PROCESSES POLICY 1.1: EXPAND HISTORIC PRESERVATION IDENTIFICATION, EVALUATION, AND PROTECTION PROGRAMS Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Office Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Expand survey process to identify important resources to be considered in all city and county planning processes. b. Update the existing National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation form for Lawrence to include properties that have achieved historic significance since c. Establish an up-to-date survey database. d. Launch an ongoing effort to create National Register and local historic districts in the city with design guidelines to maximize the potential to stabilize and increase property values while protecting resources. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-2 Action Plan

142 e. Develop and implement a Local, National Register, and State Register nomination plan for significant historic properties within the unincorporated areas of the county. f. Identify and evaluate, during the development review process, properties that are 50 years or older that will be affected by development proposals such as rezoning, platting, development plans, conditional use permits, and use permitted upon review permits. g. Develop a program to list as many eligible properties in the National Register and State Register as possible, enabling property owners to utilize the federal and state rehabilitation tax credits. h. Evaluate and consider strengthening the city s demolition ordinance. i. Explore alternative protection mechanisms used in other communities for protection programs for identified significant rural resources. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-3 Action Plan

143 POLICY 1.2: DEVELOP OR MODIFY APPROPRIATE ZONING, BUILDING CODE, AND FIRE CODE REGULATIONS TO FACILITATE THE PRESERVATION AND REHABILITATION OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Appropriate City Agency Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Investigate the possibility of creating conservation districts as an alternative protection mechanism and standard for environs review. b. Review and update existing city zoning to be compatible with existing or desired land use that promotes preservation of intact residential neighborhoods and commercial centers that have historical, architectural, and physical integrity. 1. consistency between overlay zoning and base land use zoning among contiguous properties; 2. flexible provisions for developing compatible new infill construction on vacant lots; 3. allowance of innovative preservation alternatives, such as additional or specialty uses including bed and breakfast, studios, and other professional uses; HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-4 Action Plan

144 POLICY 1.2 CONTD. Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Appropriate City Agency Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range 4. appropriate design guidelines and site development controls to encourage quality rehabilitation and compatible new construction worthy of preservation in the future; and 5. effective procedures to discourage demolition of significant buildings and structures. c. Require new development in established areas of the city to use designs complementary to the adjacent streetscape. d. Create transition zones and flexible links within Lawrence by using set backs, alleys, parks, and open space in a way that is consistent with established patterns. e. Adopt a rehabilitation code to address building code and fire code requirements in historic structures for the City of Lawrence and Douglas County. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-5 Action Plan

145 POLICY 1.3: DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT FORMALIZED PROCEDURES TO COORDINATE PRESERVATION EFFORTS AMONG CITY DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Lawrence Association of Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Appropriate City/County Agency Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Establish formalized procedures for the Lawrence Historic Resources Commission (LHRC) or the Historic Resources Administrator to review and comment on city planning activities. b. Facilitate the integration of the development review process and the building permitting process with the design review process. Consider alternative processes for project review. c. Require historic preservation elements as part of neighborhood, area, or sector plans. d. Implement consistent and systematic building and maintenance code enforcement. e. Enforce environmental code. f. Explore a demolition by neglect ordinance. g. Adopt a rehabilitation building and fire code for the city and the county. h. When possible, historic preservation issues should be represented in appointed positions. Representatives of these entities should also be considered as appointed members on the LHRC. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-6 Action Plan

146 i. Working with property owners, target significant cultural landscapes for park/green space designation. j. Working with property owners, target open space designation to areas with probability for the presence of a high level of archaeological artifacts. k. Include a preservation element in the City of Lawrence s Parks and Recreation Master Plan. l. Require review of new ordinances for their impact on historic resources and historic preservation efforts. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-7 Action Plan

147 POLICY 1.4: IMPROVE EXISTING DESIGN REVIEW AND STATE LAW REVIEW PROCESS Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Lawrence Offi Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Appropriate City/County Agency Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Conduct ongoing inspection of work after LHRC review. b. Develop review process that promotes more consistent and objective interpretation of environs law. c. Provide legal enforcement of LHRC decisions. d. Reconcile the differences between State law environs review and the City of Lawrence s environs review standards. e. Establish a recording process with the Register of Deeds to record National Register, State Register and Local Register properties. f. Investigate ways to simplify the design review process and the state law review process through the integration of building permit applications, design review applications, and development review applications. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-8 Action Plan

148 Policy 1.5: ESTABLISH CLEAR WORKING DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW PROCESSES WITH FEDERAL, STATE, COUNTY, PUBLIC, AND PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS LOCATED NEAR HISTORIC RESOURCES. Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Office Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Appropriate Institutions Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Develop agreements regarding development policies for federal, state, public and private institutions (such as the University of Kansas, Baker University, Haskell University, Lawrence Memorial Hospital, and Lawrence School District, Townships, Rural Water Districts), which are located near historic areas that include community expectations, a public participation process, and development requirements, including development of expansion boundaries. b. Neighborhood, sector, and area plans should establish clear boundaries for commercial areas as well as institutions. c. Form stronger partnerships between the Campus Historic Preservation Board and the Lawrence Historic Preservation Commission. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-9 Action Plan

149 POLICY 1.6: DEVELOP A PUBLIC RESOURCES POLICY THAT VALUES HISTORIC PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Office Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Appropriate City/County Agency Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Create a comprehensive approach to infrastructure improvements on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis. b. Protect and maintain existing brick streets, brick sidewalks, and hitching posts in the City of Lawrence. c. Restore brick streets and sidewalks in the City of Lawrence. d. Implement appropriate traffic calming measures in residential neighborhoods in the City of Lawrence. e. Investigate and implement initiatives to improve parking in Downtown Lawrence with minimal impact of older buildings. f. Improve bicycle and pedestrian routes and rural trails in central and rural locations. g. Target Parks and Recreation tax revenues when appropriate for cultural resource projects on public lands. h. Improve flood control to protect historic properties. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-10 Action Plan

150 i. Develop a formal review process for all public improvements to determine the effects on historic preservation and/or historic preservation planning efforts. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-11 Action Plan

151 GOAL # 2: IDENTIFY AND CONSERVE THE HISTORIC AREAS AND PLACES IN UNINCORPORATED DOUGLAS COUNTY POLICY 2.1: Develop a Preservation Program for the Identification and Evaluation of Cultural Resources in the Unincorporated Areas of Douglas County Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Lawrence Offi Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Develop and implement a rural survey plan to identify and evaluate rural resources based on a systematic approach by township areas, giving priority to areas with the highest rate of development. b. Working with rural property owners, develop a cultural landscape component for the identification and evaluation of cultural resources. c. Develop an archaeological survey plan for the County that: 1. includes an archaeological predictive model for Douglas County that identifies areas of high medium and low probability; and HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-12 Action Plan

152 POLICY 2.1 CONTD. Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Lawrence Association of Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range 2. prioritizes archaeological survey to focus on areas in which development is ongoing and in which resources would most likely be expected. d. Work with the State Historic Preservation Office s interactive online database, the Kansas Historic Resources Inventory (KHRI), to establish an up-todate survey database. POLICY 2.2: DEVELOP A PRESERVATION PROGRAM FOR THE PROTECTION OF CULTURAL RESOURCES IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF DOUGLAS COUNTY TO BE INTEGRATED INTO COUNTY PLANNING POLICIES AND PROCESSES. Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Develop and establish by ordinance a rural preservation program for the unincorporated areas of the county. b. Explore the benefits and liabilities of establishing Douglas County as a separate Local Certified Government. c. Investigate successful protection strategies used in other areas of the nation and develop a plan to implement those that are applicable to Douglas County, such as conservation easements and incentives to encourage private stewardship. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-13 Action Plan

153 POLICY 2.2 CONTD. Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Lawrence Association of Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Kaw Valley Heritage Alliance Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range d. Develop and implement a local and National Register and State Register nomination plan for significant historic properties within the unincorporated area of the county. e. Target and prioritize sites such as the natural areas unplowed prairie and woodlands identified in Horizon 2020 for preservation. f. Target significant cultural landscapes for park/green space designation. g. Target open space to areas with a predictive model for the presence of a high level of archaeological artifacts. h. Investigate the use of funding mechanisms to retain open space around historic sites. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-14 Action Plan

154 POLICY 2.3: ELIMINATE DISINCENTIVES TO ORDERLY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Require annexation plans and urban growth boundaries from all municipalities within Douglas County. b. Develop policies that encourage development within the urban growth boundaries of associated municipalities. POLICY 2.4: CONSERVE THE VISUAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN CITY AND RURAL AREAS Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Lawrence Association of Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Kaw Valley Heritage Alliance Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Create transition zones from rural areas to the city using wetlands, open spaces, parks, golf courses, "rails to trails," small farm transition areas, and commercial/rural transition areas, i.e., businesses that require open space. b. Create limits on development outside the urban growth areas or boundaries. c. Promote retention of agricultural land use through programs such as the transfer of development rights and conservation easements. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-15 Action Plan

155 GOAL # 3: Incorporate Preservation Incentives into THE CITY and County s Economic Development Policies and Programs Policy 3.1: Encourage the Utilization and Linkage of Existing Incentives Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Develop a program to list as many eligible properties in the National Register and State Register as possible, enabling property owners to utilize the federal and state rehabilitation tax credits. b. Maximize the use of incentives by combining them into preservation tool kits different combinations of incentives targeted for specific areas and tailored to certain needs to provide flexible and lasting strategies to address stabilization and revitalization of older residential and commercial centers. c. Target public incentives to projects in areas with existing public infrastructure and significant historic resources. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-16 Action Plan

156 POLICY 3.1: CONTD. Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range d. Notify owners of eligible properties and assist them in providing access to applicable rehabilitation incentives and grants. e. Investigate the use of Community Development Block Grant funds to foster historic preservation efforts. f. Establish and fund the Historic Preservation Fund as described in city s Conservation of Historic Resources Code. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-17 Action Plan

157 POLICY 3.2: DEVELOP INCENTIVES TO ENCOURAGE THE REHABILITATION AND OCCUPANCY OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Office Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Chamber of Commerce Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Attach appropriate design guidelines to incentive programs. b. Create taxing incentives by using such tools as the Neighborhood Revitalization Act. c. Create incentives to increase critical mass development in Downtown Lawrence. d. Create and target incentives to historic commercial areas such as façade improvement grants and economic incentives to owners or businesses that occupy or lease space in historic buildings. e. Develop and implement policies and programs that eliminate parking issues as a disincentive to rehabilitation of buildings, including review of use permits and accompanying parking requirements and implementation of public/private shared use of parking structures. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-18 Action Plan

158 POLICY 3.2: CONTD. Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Office Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Chamber of Commerce Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range f. Create incentives to preserve significant farming areas. g. Provide design and/or technical assistance to property owners undertaking preservation projects, such as schematic architectural design assistance for renovation/restoration of residences, businesses, and rural structures. h. Develop incentives to retain and strengthen small neighborhood commercial areas. i. Utilize or create incentive programs for abatement of environmental hazards in significant historic buildings. j. Provide incentives to reduce the number of multi-family units in houses originally designed as single-family residences that are located in historic and conservation districts. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-19 Action Plan

159 POLICY 3.3: ELIMINATE DISINCENTIVES TO PRESERVATION EFFORTS Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Office Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Tax properties that are listed in the National Register, State Register, or Local Register at a lower rate. b. Abolish or develop a lower fee schedule for rehabilitation building permits. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-20 Action Plan

160 GOAL # 4: INCORPORATE HERITAGE TOURISM AS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM POLICY 4.1: DEVELOP A COMPREHENSIVE HERITAGE TOURISM PROGRAM THAT INTEGRATES HISTORIC RESOURCES AND VENDORS INTO PROGRAM PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION a. Investigate and pursue National Heritage Area Designation. Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Lawrence Convention & Visitors Bureau Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range b. Encourage and enter into cooperative regional efforts in programming and networking in public relations and marketing efforts. c. Support efforts to ensure the Watkins Community Museum is an important visible partner in heritage tourism and community education efforts. d. Through the National Trust for Historic Preservation Heritage Tourism Program, the city/county should enlist the participation of all communities, site and museums in Douglas County to conduct a comprehensive management and interpretive assessment and to develop cooperative interpretive, marketing and programming plans. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-21 Action Plan

161 POLICY 4.1: DEVELOP A COMPREHENSIVE HERITAGE TOURISM PROGRAM THAT INTEGRATES HISTORIC RESOURCES AND VENDORS INTO PROGRAM PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION e. Develop cooperative efforts between the Lawrence/ Douglas County Chamber of Commerce and local preservation groups. Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Lawrence Convention & Visitors Bureau Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-22 Action Plan

162 GOAL # 5: ESTABLISH OUTREACH AND EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS POLICY 5.1: DEVELOP A GOVERNMENT SPONSORED PUBLIC INFORMATION OUTREACH PROGRAM Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Office Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Make public aware of available funding sources. b. Develop or provide hands-on material that provides information on how to repair and preserve historic buildings according to the Secretary of the Interior s Guidelines for the Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings. c. Provide information on historic neighborhoods (i.e. promote walking tours). d. Provide notification each spring, prior to the construction season, to property owners in local districts, National Register properties, and State Register properties of the design guidelines and procedures to obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness and/or Certified Local Government Review. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-23 Action Plan

163 POLICY 5.1 CONTD. Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Office Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range e. Develop in-house materials for other city/county department staff about preservation processes and issues to assist in building consensus in applying preservation procedures. f. Provide ongoing preservation education sessions for members of appointed bodies including the Historic Resources Commission, City Commission, and Planning Commission. g. Expand the city s webpage to include additional information regarding National Register listing, survey information, how-to materials, etc. h. Work with existing hardware and home improvement stores to provide hands on materials regarding historic preservation issues. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-24 Action Plan

164 POLICY 5.2: IN PARTNERSHIP WITH AN APPROPRIATE LOCAL ORGANIZATION, ASSIST IN DEVELOPING AND CONDUCTING A SERIES OF PUBLIC WORKSHOPS TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC ABOUT PRESERVATION Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Establish forums for realtors, developers, preservationists, business community leaders, and neighborhood groups to acquaint them with preservation benefits, issues, and procedures. POLICY 5.3: DEVELOP MEDIA RELATIONS TO BE AN ADVOCATE FOR PRESERVATION Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Lawrence Offi Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Promote preservation news in local press through press releases during National Preservation Week that focus on the economic impact of preservation, as well as local newsworthy events, and recent local, state or national designations, etc. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-25 Action Plan

165 POLICY 5.4: DEVELOP PROACTIVE RECOGNITION PROGRAMS Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Develop a countywide Heritage Farm honorific program. b. Develop historic signage. c. Continue the Paul Wilson Preservation Awards program. POLICY 5.5: COORDINATE PRESERVATION PROGRAMS IN THE COUNTY AND CITY WITH OTHER LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS AND ORGANIZATIONS Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Establish a countywide coordinating entity that includes private and public organizations and agencies. Primary goals should be: 1. development of an outreach program to unincorporated areas of the county to involve property owners in historic preservation initiatives; and 2. joining rural and city constituencies in cooperative efforts. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-26 Action Plan

166 GOAL # 6: INCORPORATE SUSTAINABLE PRESERVATION INTO THE CITY AND COUNTY S SUSTAINABILITY POLICIES AND PROGRAMS POLICY 6.1: ENCOURAGE AND INCORPORATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN SUSTAINABLE PLANNING AND BUILDING PRACTICES Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Office Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range a. Foster a culture of reuse of existing structures by maximizing the life cycle of existing buildings. b. Encourage reinvestment in the existing built environment. 1. Explore and adopt building codes that give a discount on the overall permit fee for the reuse of historic structures. 2. Identify and promote programs that identify historic building materials, like first growth wood and historic lath and plaster, and the values they bring to structures. c. Explore the use of outcomebased codes. d. Explore the adoption of building codes that create sustainable communities. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-27 Action Plan

167 e. Explore the adoption of demolition codes that require sustainable practices like 1. A percentage of demolition debris to be recycled and reused 2. Demolition permit fees that reflect the values of historic resources. POLICY 6.2: DEVELOP PROGRAMS THAT ENCOURAGE PRESERVATION AS PART OF CREATING A SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY. a. Develop and adopt sustainability design guidelines for historic districts. b. Develop and implement programs for City and County buildings that maintain historic fabric and reduce natural resource consumption. c. Encourage and support the development of energy strategies.. d. Encourage and support the development of sustainable energy systems that can provide energy for multiple historic properties that cannot achieve sustainable energy goals individually. e. Utilize increased permit fees for the demolition of historic structures to fund a preservation fund to create low interest loans or grants that facilitate the rehabilitation of historic structures. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-28 Action Plan

168 POLICY 6.3: DEVELOP AN EDUCATION PROGRAM TO INCORPORATE SUSTAINABLE PRESERVATION INTO PUBLIC INFORMATION OUTREACH PROGRAMS ON SUSTAINABILITY a. Develop City and County Sponsored Public Information Outreach Programs that promote sustainability through preservation and rehabilitation of historic structures. 1. Establish forums for realtors, developers, contractors, and preservationists to inform them about sustainable preservation benefits, issues and procedures. Historic Resources Commission Lawrence/Douglas County Planning Office Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods Planning Commission City Commission County Commission Lawrence Preservation Alliance Ongoing Short Range Mid-Range Long Range b. Align Historic Preservation Policies with sustainability policies. 1. Assist the Sustainability Advisory Board with the development of goals and priorities for future cultural resource conservation efforts. 2. Work with the Sustainability Coordinator to identify practical methods and programs to reach the City s goals for sustainability. 3. Identify and encourage the adoption of Preservation goals, policies, and programs that incorporate sustainable community ideals. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-29 Action Plan

169 c. Work with the Sustainability Coordinator to identify education programs and opportunities to promote preservation and sustainability. d. Promote educational programs that identify sustainable development and how it differs from sustainable design. HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-30 Action Plan

170 Appendices HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-31 Action Plan

171 Exhibits and Maps List of Douglas County National Register and State Register Properties List of Lawrence Register Properties City of Lawrence Surveyed Properties City of Lawrence Recommended Survey Plan Douglas County Unincorporated Area Surveyed Properties Douglas County Unincorporated Area Survey Plan HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-32 Action Plan

172 NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES City of Lawrence Achning, Ralph and Cloyd, House, Craftsman Bungalow, c Missouri Street Listed in the National Register in 1987 Criterion B (Commerce: Ralph and Cloyd Achning) and Criterion C (Architecture: Bungalow) Period of Significance: 1924 Bailey Hall, c.1900 University of Kansas, Jayhawk Boulevard Listed in the National Register in 2001 Criterion A, B (Science and Education [E. H. S. Bailey]) Period of Significance: Bell, George and Annie, House, Folk House National, c Ohio Street Listed in the National Register in 1983 Criterion A (Associated with the Quantrill s Raid); Criterion A (Exploration and Settlement: Patterns of Lawrence Development; and Criterion C (Architecture: Folk House National) Period of Significance: Benedict House, Vernacular/Folk Victorian, c Tennessee Street Listed in the National Register in 1992 Criterion A (Social History: Growth and Development of Lawrence) and Criterion C (Architecture: Folk Victorian) Period of Significance: Blood, Col. James and Eliza, House, Italianate, c Tennessee Street Listed in the National Register in 1972 Criterion C (Architecture: Italianate) Period of Significance: 1870 Breezedale Historic District Massachusetts Street south of 23 rd Street Listed in the National Register in 2007 Criterion A, C (Community Planning and Architecture) Period of Significance: HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-33 Action Plan

173 Carnegie Library (Old Lawrence City Library), Beaux Arts/Classical Revival, c West 9th Street Listed in the National Register in 1975 Criterion A (Education: Library of Lawrence) and Criterion C (Architecture: Classical Revival) Period of Significance: Double Hyperbolic Paraboloid, c W 21 st Street Listed in the National Register in 2007 Criterion C, (Architecture and Engineering) Period of Significance: 1956 Douglas County Court House, Richardson Romanesque, Massachusetts Street Listed in the National Register in 1975 Criterion C (Architecture and Work of a Master: Richardson Romanesque and John G. Haskell) Period of Significance: Duncan, Charles and Adeline, House, Italianate, c Tennessee Street Listed in the National Register in 1986 Criterion A (Exploration and Settlement: Development of Lawrence) and Criterion C (Architecture: Italianate) Period of Significance: 1869 Dyche Hall, Romanesque, c.1901 University of Kansas, 1031 Oread Avenue Listed in the National Register in 1974 Criterion B (Education Lewis Lindsay Dyche) and Criterion C (Architecture: Romanesque) Period of Significance: East Lawrence Industrial Historic District 8 th Street on north, 9 th Street on south, Pennsylvania Street on west and Delaware Street on west Listed in the National Register in 2007 Criterion A (Commerce, Industry and Community Planning) Period of Significance: Eldridge Hotel, Neo-Georgian, c Massachusetts Street Listed in the National Register in 1986 Criterion B (Commerce: William G. Huston) and Criterion C (Architecture: Neo- Georgian) Period of Significance: HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-34 Action Plan

174 English Lutheran Church, Gothic Revival, c New Hampshire Street Listed in the National Register in 1995 Criterion B (Social History: English Lutheran Church) and Criterion C (Architecture: Gothic Revival) Period of Significance: Fernand-Strong, c University Drive Listed in the National Register in 2007 Criterion A (Community Development) and Criterion B (Significant Person, Frank Strong) Period of Significance: Goodrich, Eugene F., House, Queen Anne, c Massachusetts Street Listed in the National Register in 2001 Criterion C (Architecture: Late Victorian Queen Anne) Nomination also discusses association with Goodrich who resided in the residence until Period of Significance: 1890 Green Hall, Beaux Arts/ Greco Roman Revival, c.1904 University of Kansas, 1300 Jayhawk Boulevard Listed in the National Register in 1974 Criterion C (Architecture: Greco-Roman Revival) Period of Significance: 1904 Greenlee, Michael D. House, c Louisiana Street Listed in the National Register in 2004 Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: 1903 Hancock Historic District Mississippi Street on west, property lines on north, Indiana Street or Oread Ave on east and property lines on south Listed in the National Register in 2004 Criterion A (Community Planning) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: Haskell Institute (Nomination was altered to be multiple-property listing). Includes The Arch (1926); Haskell Stadium (1926); Auditorium (1933); Hiawatha Hall (1898); Tecumseh Hall (1915); Pushmataha Hall (1929); Band Stand (1908); Pocahontas Hall (1931); Kiva Hall (1898); Powhatan Hall (1932); Old Dairy (1907); and Indian Cemetery. Haskell Campus, 23rd Street and Barker Avenue Listed as a National Historic Landmark in 1961 Listed in the National Register in 1987 HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-35 Action Plan

175 Criterion B (Education: Haskell Institute) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: House, Edward Residence, c Massachusetts Street Listed in the National Register in 2007 Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: 1894 Lawrence s Downtown Historic District Massachusetts Street from 6 th Street to South Park Street Listed in the National Register in 2004 Criterion A (Commerce and Community Planning) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: Ludington/Thacher Houses, Italianate, c Tennessee Street Listed in the National Register in 1971 Criterion C (Architecture: Italianate) Period of Significance Environs delineation adopted in 1998 Mackie, George K, House, c Massachusetts Street Listed in the National Register in 2009 Criterion A (Commerce) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: 1917 McCurdy, Witter S., House, c West 6 th Street Listed in the National Register in 2001 Criterion C (Architecture: Folk House National) Period of Significance: 1870 Miller, Robert H., House, Folk House National, c East 19 th Street Listed in the National Register in 1984 Criterion B (Exploration/Settlement: Robert M. Miller) and Criterion C (Architecture: Folk House National) Period of Significance: Morse, Dr. Frederick D., House, Late Victorian: Queen Anne, c Tennessee Street Listed in the National Register in 1991 Criterion B (Health and Medicine: Frederick Morse) and Criterion C (Architecture: Queen Anne) Period of Significance: Criterion B: ; Criterion C: HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-36 Action Plan

176 North Rhode Island Historic District , , Rhode Island Street Listed in the National Register in 2004 Criterion A (Community Development) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: Old West Lawrence Tennessee Street: 600s, 700s, and 800s (odd only) Ohio Street: 600s, 700s, and 805 Louisiana Street: 600s, 700s, 800, and 801 Indiana Street: 600s, 700s, and 801 Listed in the National Register in 1972 Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: Oread Neighborhood Historic District Between W 9 th and 12 th Streets and alleys behind Louisiana and Kentucky Streets Listed in the National Register in 2007 Criterion A (Community Development) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: Pinckney I Historic District W 5 th Street, Tennessee Street, W 6 th Street, includes Louisiana and W 5 th Street Listed in the National Register in 2004 Criterion A (Community Development) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: Pinckney II Historic District W 3 rd Street, Louisiana Street, W 4 th Street and Mississippi Street Listed in the National Register in 2004 Criterion A (Community Development) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: Plymouth Congregational Church, c Vermont Street Listed in the National Register in 2006 Criterion C (Architecture: John G Haskell, Architect) Period of Significance: Priestly, William, House, Folk House National, c Kentucky Street Listed in the National Register in 1988 Criterion A (Social History: Development of Lawrence) and Criterion C (Architecture: Folk Victorian) Period of Significance: HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-37 Action Plan

177 Riggs, Samuel, House, Italianate, c and Pennsylvania Street Listed in the National Register in 1977 Criterion B (Politics/Government: Samuel Riggs and Western Settlement) and Criterion C (Architecture: Italianate) Period of Significance: 1864 Roberts, John N., House, Richardson Romanesque, c Massachusetts Street Listed in the National Register in 1974 Criterion C (Architecture: Richardson Romanesque) Period of Significance: Saint Luke African Methodist Episcopal Church, c New York Street Listed in the National Register in 2005 Criterion A (Ethnic Heritage: African American) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: South Rhode Island Historic District E Rhode Island, W Rhode Island, E New Hampshire, W New Hampshire Listed in the National Register in 2004 Criterion A (Community Development) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: Criterion A, , Criterion C, Snow, Jane A., Residence, Shingle Style, c West 12th Street Listed in the National Register in 1996 Criterion B (Person: William Griffith) and Criterion C (Architecture: Shingle Style) Period of Significance: 1910 Spooner Hall, Romanesque, c.1894 University of Kansas, Louisiana Street Listed in the National Register in 1974 Criterion C (Architecture and the Work of a Master: Richardson Romanesque and Henry Van Brunt) Period of Significance: 1894 Stephens, Judge Nelson T., House, Folk House National, c North Michigan Listed in the National Register in 1982 Criterion B (Politics/Government: Judge Nelson T. Stephens) and Criterion C (Architecture: Farmstead/Folk House National) Period of Significance: 1871 HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-38 Action Plan

178 Strong Hall, Beaux Arts, c University of Kansas, Jayhawk Boulevard Listed in the Register of Kansas Historic Places in 1998 Criterion A (Education; University of Kansas) and Criterion C (Architecture: Beaux Arts) Period of Significance: Taylor, Lucy Hobbs, House, Italianate, c Vermont Street Listed in the National Register in 1982 Criterion B (Social Science History: Lucy Hobbs Taylor) Period of Significance: United States Post Office, c New Hampshire Street Listed in the National Register in 2002 Criterion C (Architecture: James Knox Taylor) Period of Significance: 1906 Usher, John Palmer and Margaret, House, Italianate, c Tennessee Street Listed in the National Register in 1975 Criterion B (Commerce: Union Pacific Railroad; Political: John Palmer Usher) and Criterion C (Architecture: Italianate) Period of Significance: United Presbyterian Center/ Ecumenical Christian Ministries Building 1204 Oread Avenue Listed in the National Register in 2009 Criterion C (Architecture: Modern) Period of Significance: 1959 Watkins Bank (Old City Hall), Richardson Romanesque, c Massachusetts Street Listed in the National Register in 1971 Criterion B (Commerce: Jabez B. Watkins Bank) and Criterion C (Architecture: Richardson Romanesque) Period of Significance: Zimmerman, Albert and S. T., House, Second Empire, c Indiana Street Listed in the National Register in 1974 Criterion C (Architecture: Second Empire) Period of Significance: 1870 HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-39 Action Plan

179 Douglas County Barnes Apple Barn, c E 1728 Rd, Baldwin City vicinity Listed in the National Register in 2006 Criterion B (Significant Person: William Barnes) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: Black Jack Battlefield US Highway 56 and County Road 200, 3 miles east of Baldwin City Listed in the National Register in 2004 Criterion A (Military) Period of Significance: 1856 Case Library at Baker University Eighth and Grover, Baldwin City Listed in the National Register in 1986 Criterion A (Community Planning) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: Chicken Creek Bridge, c Lone Star vicinity Listed in the National Register in 1990 Criterion C (Transportation and Engineering) Period of Significance: 1913 Clinton School District 25, c North 604 East Road, Lawrence vicinity Listed in the National Register in 1998 Criterion A (Education) Period of Significance: Coal Creek Library, c E 1719 Road, Baldwin City vicinity Listed in the National Register in 2003 Criterion A (Entertainment and Recreation) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: Douglas County Trail Segments, Douglas County Prairie Park Three miles east of Baldwin on US-56, Douglas County Lane University Lecompton Listed in National Register in 1971 Criterion A (Education) Period of Significance: HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-40 Action Plan

180 Lecompton Constitution Hall, c Elmore, Lecompton Listed in the National Register in 1971 Criterion A (Political) Period of Significance: National Historic Landmark: 1971 Old Castle Hall, c Fifth Street, Baldwin City Listed in the National Register in 1971 Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: 1858 Parmenter Hall, Baker University Eighth and Dearborn, Baldwin City Listed in National Register in 1977 Criterion A (Education) Period of Significance: Pilla, Charles House, c Elm, Eudora Listed in National Register in 1974 Criterion A (Commerce: Charles Pilla) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: 1894 Quayle, William A. House, c N. 6 th Street Listed in the National Register in 2001 Criterion B (Education: William Quayle) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: Santa Fe Depot, c High, Baldwin City Listed in National Register in 1983 Criterion A (Transportation) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: 1907 Stoebener Barn, c.1914 NW ¼ SW ¼ NE ¼, SW ¼ S6-T15S-R19E Listed in the National Register in 1989 Criterion C (Architecture: two-story vernacular barn) Period of Significance: 1914 Stony Point Evangelical Lutheran Church, c N 600 Road, Baldwin City Listed in the National Register in 2006 Criterion A (Social History) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-41 Action Plan

181 Vermilya-Boener House, c NE ¼ SE ¼ SE ¼ SE ¼, S-12, T-12S, R-19E Listed in the National Register of Historic Places in 1991 Criterion B (Association with Persons: Elijah and Cynthia Vermilya, William Boener, and Ella Virginia Vermilya-Boener) and Criterion C (Architecture: Italian Villa, Italianate) Period of Significance: Vinland Association Fairgrounds Exhibit Building, c N 700 Road, Vinland Listed in National Register in 2004 Criterion A (Entertainment and Recreation) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: Vinland Grange Hall, 1875 Junction of Oak and Main streets Listed in the National Register in 2000 Period of Significance: , , Vinland Presbyterian Church, c E 1725 Road, Vinland Listed in National Register in 2003 Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: 1879 REGISTER OF KANSAS HISTORIC PLACES [All properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places are listed in the Register of Kansas Historic Places.] City of Lawrence Bailey Hall, c.1900 University of Kansas, Jayhawk Boulevard Listed in the Register of Kansas Historic Places in 1995 Criterion B (Education [E. H. S. Bailey]) Period of Significance: Eldridge, Shalor, Residence, Folk House National, c Rhode Island Listed in the Register of Kansas Historic Places in 1979 Criterion B (Person: Shalor Eldridge) Period of Significance: HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-42 Action Plan

182 Chi Omega Sorority House, Jacobethan, c West Campus Road Listed in the Register of Kansas Historic Places in 1983 Criterion C (Architecture: Jacobethan) Period of Significance: 1925 Consolidated Barb Wire Building, c New Hampshire Listed in the Register of Kansas Historic Places in 1988 Criterion A (Industry: Industrial Development of Lawrence) and Criterion C (Architecture: Industrial) Period of Significance: Ferdinand Fuller House, c Sunset Drive Listed in the Register of Kansas Historic Places in 2011 Criterion B (Settlement: Ferdinand Fuller) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: Greenlees, John Robert House, c Mississippi Street Listed in the Register of Kansas Historic Places in 2009 Criterion A (Commerce, Industry and Economics) Period of Significance: House Building, c Massachusetts Street Listed in the Register of Kansas Historic Places in 2000 Criterion A (Community Development and Economics) Period of Significance: Union Pacific Depot, Romanesque, c North 2 nd Street Listed in the Register of Kansas Historic Places in 1989 Criterion B (Person: Henry Van Brunt) and Criterion C (Architecture: Romanesque) Wiggins, Dudley, Residence, Folk Victorian, c West 21 st Street Listed in the Register of Kansas Historic Places in 1986 Criterion B (Person: Dudley Wiggins) Period of Significance: HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-43 Action Plan

183 Douglas County Palmyra Mason Lodge, c High Street, Baldwin City Listed in Register of Kansas Historic Places in 2011 Criterion A (Social History) Period of Significance: 1894 Robert Hall Pearson Farm, c E 2000 Road, Baldwin City vicinity Listed in Register of Kansas Historic Places in 2005 Criterion A (Settlement and Social History) and Criterion C (Architecture) Period of Significance: LAWRENCE REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES 820 New Jersey Listed in Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 2006 Criterion #1 (Community Development), #4 (Architecture) Period of Significance: Bailey, E. H. S., Residence, Dutch Colonial Revival, c Ohio Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 2000 Criterion #3 (Person: E. H. S. Bailey) Period of Significance: Environs delineated March 2000 Bell, George and Annie, House, Folk House National, c Ohio Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1991 Criterion #1 (Shows evolution of residential structures); Criterion #2 (Site: Quantrill s Raid); Criterion #3 (Person: George Bell); Criterion #4 (Architecture: Greek Temple Form); and Criterion #6 (Architecture: Greek Temple Form) Period of Significance: Not Listed Benedict House, Folk Victorian, c Tennessee Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1990 Criterion #4 (Architecture: Queen Anne) Period of Significance: Not Listed Dillard House, Queen Anne, c Louisiana Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1990 Criterion #3 (Person: Dillard Family/African-American Heritage) Period of Significance: Not Listed HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-44 Action Plan

184 Double Hyperbolic Paraboloid, c W 21 st Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 2008 Criterion #4 (Architecture) and #6 (Engineering) Period of Significance: 1956 Duncan House, Italianate, c Tennessee Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1990 Criterion #3 (Person: Charles S. Duncan) and Criterion #4 (Architecture: Italianate) Period of Significance: Not Listed East Lawrence Industrial Historic District 8 th Street on north, 9 th Street on south, Pennsylvania Street on west and Delaware Street on west Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1990 Criterion #1 (Community Development), #3 (Significant Person), #4 (Architecture) Period of Significance: Eldridge, Shalor, House, Folk House National, Rhode Island Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1990 Criterion #3 (Person: Colonel Shalor Eldridge) Period of Significance: Not Listed Fernand-Strong, c University Drive Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 2010 Criterion #1 (Development) and #3 (Person: Frank Strong ) Period of Significance: Fire Station # Massachusetts Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 2006 Criterion #1 (Development) and #4 (Architecture) Period of Significance: 1928 Fischer, Otto House, c Connecticut Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 2007 Criterion #3 (Person: Otto Fischer) and #4 (Architecture) Period of Significance: 1892 HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-45 Action Plan

185 Greenlees, John Robert House, c Mississippi Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 2010 Criterion #4 (Architecture) Period of Significance: Griffith House, Stick Style, c Ohio Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1990 Criterion #4 (Architecture: Stick Style) Period of Significance: 1888 Grover Barn, c Stone Barn Terrace Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 2006 Criterion #1 (Development),#2 (Location), #3 (Person) Period of Significance: 1858 Hanna Building, c. 933 Massachusetts Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 2002 Criterion #4 (Architecture) and #6 (Design) Period of Significance: Not Listed Hendry House, I-House, c Rhode Island Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1990 Criterion #2 (Site: Survived Quantrill s Raid); Criterion #3 (Person: Judge Hendry); and Criterion #4 (Architecture: Georgian I-House) Period of Significance: Not Listed Hobbs Park, c E 11 th Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 2006 Criterion #1 (Development), #2 (Location), #3 (Person: Hobbs) Period of Significance: House Building, Early Twentieth-century Commercial, c Massachusetts Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1990 Criterion #2 (Site: Quantrill s Raid) and Criterion #3 (Person: Robert House) Period of Significance: House, Edward Residence, c Massachusetts Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 2007 Criterion #4 (Architecture), #6 (Design) Period of Significance: 1894 HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-46 Action Plan

186 Ludington/Thacher Residence, Italianate, c Tennessee Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1998 Criterion #3 (Person: R. W. Ludington and Judge Solon O. Thacher); Criterion #4 (Architecture); and Criterion #8 (Unique location/visual feature) Period of Significance: Environs delineated May 1997 McAllaster, Octavius W., Residence, Vernacular (Gable-front form), c.1858, Rhode Island Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1997 Criterion #2 (Quantrill s Raid); Criterion #3 (Person: Octavius W. McAllaster); and Criterion #4 (Architecture: Vernacular/Greek Temple) Period of Significance: Not Listed McCurdy House, I-house, c West 6th Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1990 Criterion #3 (Person: Witter S., Jesse and Emily McCurdy) and Criterion #4 (Architecture: I-House) Period of Significance: Not Listed McFarland House, Folk House National, Queen Anne, c Rhode Island Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1990 Criterion #3 (Person: Charles McFarland) Period of Significance: Not Listed Miller s Hall, Italianate, c Massachusetts Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places Criterion #1 (Social: Gathering place for many groups); Criterion #2 (Site of the first newspaper published in Kansas); and Criterion #6 (Architecture/ craftsmanship: Italianate) Period of Significance: Not Listed Miller, Robert H., House, Folk House National, c East 19 th Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1990 Criterion #2 (Site: Survived Quantrill s Raid); Criterion #3 (Person: Robert Miller); Criterion #4 (Architecture: Greek Temple form); and Criterion #5 (Master Builder: Not Identified) Period of Significance: Listed as HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-47 Action Plan

187 Morse, Dr. Frederick, House, Queen Anne, c Tennessee Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1990 Criterion #3 (Person: Dr. Frederick D. Morse) and Criterion #4 (Architecture: Queen Anne) Period of Significance: Not Listed Oread Historic District Even numbers of the 1000 block of Ohio Street and the Odd numbers of the 1000 block of Tennessee Street. Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1990 Criterion #1 (Development of Lawrence: Typical Oread Block); #3 (Person: Many Prominent Citizens); and #4 (Architecture: Represents several styles e.g. Queen Anne, Vernacular, Italianate) Period of Significance: Plymouth Congregational Church, c Vermont Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 2007 Criterion #1 (Development), #4 (Architecture), #5 (Master Builder), #6 (Design) Period of Significance: Roberts, John N., House, Richardson Romanesque, c Massachusetts Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1990 Criterion #3 (Person: John Roberts); Criterion #5 (Architect: John G. Haskell); and Criterion #6(Architecture: Richardson Romanesque) Period of Significance: Not Listed Shane, J. B., Juno Bell Shane Thompson Studio, c Massachusetts Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1990 Criterion #3 (Person: J. B. Shane and Juno-Bell Shane) Period of Significance: Not listed Snow, Jane A., Residence, Shingle Style, c West 12 th Street Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1990 Criterion #3 (Person: William A. Griffith) and Criterion #4 (Architecture: Shingle Style) Period of Significance: 1910 Social Service League, Folk House National, c Rhode Island Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 2000 Criterion #3 (Group: Social Service League); Criterion #4 (Architecture: Stone Vernacular); Criterion #8 (Unique location/visual feature); and Criterion #9 (Utilitarian structure) HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-48 Action Plan

188 Period of Significance: (1864-Present) Environs delineated March 2000 South Park, c.1854-present Bounded by Vermont Street on the west, New Hampshire Street and vacated New Hampshire Street on the east, North Park Street on the north, and South Park Street on the south. Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 2000 Criterion #2 (Location of a significant local, county, or state event) and Criterion #8 (Unique location/visual feature) Period of Significance: 1854-Present Environs delineated March 2000 Stephens, Judge Nelson, House, Folk House National, c North Michigan Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 1990 Criterion #1 (Representative of 1880s farmstead); Criterion #3 (Person: Judge Nelson T. Stephens); Criterion #4 (Architecture: 1870 Vernacular/ gravity flow water system); and Criterion #5 (Master builder not identified) Period of Significance: Not Listed Zinn-Burroughs House, c Learnard Avenue Listed in the Lawrence Register of Historic Places in 2005 Criterion #3 (Person: William Burroughs) and #4 (Architecture) Period of Significance: Not Listed HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-49 Action Plan

189 City of Lawrence Surveyed Properties HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-50 Map

190 City of Lawrence Recommended Survey Plan HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-51 Map

191 HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-52 Map

192 HORIZON 2020 Preservation Plan Element 6-53 Map